Posted on 05/16/2010 8:28:50 AM PDT by highlander_UW
The Second Revolution is on the way!
By Dave Duffy
Does anyone know how much money a trillion dollars is? It's a handy thing to know because our country will be about $12.5 trillion in debt by the time you read this.
snip
There are several ways to try to get a mental grip on just how much money a trillion is. Reader Harvey Smith of Visalia, California, suggests we think of it in seconds: One million seconds would take you back 11.5 days, one billion seconds would take you back 31.7 years, and one trillion seconds would take you back 31,546 years. So 12.5 trillion seconds would take you back just under 400,000 years, which is an easy number for me to remember because I have written several articles about Antarctica ice cores, which conveniently date back through four ice ages to 400,000 years ago.
snip
Here's another way to look at it: According to the Treasury Department, a new $1 bill is .0043 inches thick.
snip
(Excerpt) Read more at backwoodshome.com ...
Not only would the libs turn law enforcing and the military on their own citizens, but would bring UN troops to kill Americans.
LLS
ABSOLUTELY!!!!
-----
THEY ARE THE ONES WHO PUT US INTO DEBT. Not us. THEM-----> living breathing men and women, ALL FOUR HUNDRED and THIRTY-FIVE in the House of Representatives and ALL ONE HUNDRED in the SENATE.
While I am not happy with our elected "representatives," they would not have had the power to do any of that if it weren't for the parasite class of voters. There is obviously enough parasites out there to keep "them" in power. Likewise, there is obviously more than enough complicit voters that allowed the RINO Party to partcipate in the game and play "socialist lite."
You want someone to blame? It is your fellow American that voted these people in; rewarding them with donations and re-election. Politicians by their nature look out for whatever they can get away with. The American voter didn't complain enough when life was "grand" now did they? Of course not, because it was someone else footing the bill.
We have a government "for the people and OF the people." It is "WE THE PEOPLE" that are ultimately responsible for what our government does/not do. We are given the government we elect and deserve. If we do not hold them accountable, who is to blame? When you cede your rights and freedoms to your goernment, can you blame them for taking your rights and freedoms? How is it "theft" if you willingly gave it away?
It is your friend, family member, and neighbor that collects welfare, and WIC, and food stamps. It is that peson that has the "free" cellphone, "free school breakfast and lunch. It is that person that has subsidized housing, the useless government union job.
As with anything else, there is SUPPLY and DEMAND in politics. There would not be a SUPPLY of socialist spending programs without the DEMAND. There would not be pandering, wasteful, spineless politicians if there was not a DEMAND for them. These things cannot exist if there was accountability.
Peter will continue to get robbed until he defends himself. The problem comes when Peter pays more and more people. Eventually Paul, Tim, Joe, Mike, and Bill realize if Peter quits paying their free ride is over.... so the bully Peter. Peter should have stood up and put a quash on it when it was just Paul that was reaping the benefit.
None of this happens in a vaccuum. Americans need to realize that it is not our politicians to blame, but US. It is akin to saying "guns kill people," or an "SUV drove through a crowd." Someone is responsible for those actions.
It will continue to happen so long as taxpayers continue to pay taxes and fail to resist.....or the system will eventually tip too far and collapse.
Even if we tossed out EVERY LAST representative in federal state, and local government the problem would continue so long as you have not CHANGED THE MIND OF THE PEOPLE. Once the new batch realized they could pander and buy votes the process would repeat.
Even here on FR, you can find someone that will defend just about any wasteful program. It is ok to cut programs....just someone else's. Then, there are others [on here] that think cutting programs is "cruel."
Telecommuting is an interesting option...and one that would disallow for the many times our "representatives" fail to even show up to votes.
Yes, I get charged for any connect time, rather I instigate the call or someone calls me.
Obviously my phone use is much less than many people, so what I do won't necessarily work for others. A salesman, for instance, lives and dies by their contacts...they're going to need an unlimited type account. But if you don't use your phone for more than calling to order a pizza on occasion and to arrange to meet for coffee or set up a doctor appointment...well, I just don't use the phone all that much.
There has been a few occasions where I had a friend who was going through life difficulties and in those cases I just figure it's worth the cost if I have to stay on the phone...but those are rare and often better dealt with personally anyway.
A teen who lives on the phone would also probably chafe at paying attention...so as I said, not for everyone, but it's a heck of a lot cheaper than the alternatives in my case.
It certainly is! I am going to look into it.
Let the Libs think that, but the reality is far harsher toward them than that. There are millions of "from my cold dead hands" types that will never go along. It will not happen. They would have already tried if they thought they could pull it off. We are going to put them in their place in November, and when we regain some "balls" we are going to hunt down and try them for Treason soon. They are TRAITORS, and that is still a very serious crime. The UN can leave the U.S. and go to H_LL!
“Telecommute”
—
I first proposed that to a Pol while I was living in OKC about 15 years ago. He agreed it made sense then, but now the technology makes it a “no brainer”.
Can you imagine how that would cut the cost of operation of the Federal Government to disperse the functions throught the country.
And in the event of a catastrophy, we could still function as a nation.
Can you imagine how that would cut the cost of operation of the Federal Government to disperse the functions throught the country.
And in the event of a catastrophy, we could still function as a nation.
I agree...and I can think of a few additional benefits. It would, as I believe you mentioned, keep the pol located close to their constituency, it'd save on travel time and costs (of course), it'd remove most excuses for pol's to not bother to vote so they don't have a voting record on some bill.
Now they probably wouldn't like it because it'd be harder to press for pols to toe the party line...which is generally a good thing. They should be able and willing to stand up for their votes.
If I ever run across some politicians I'll suggest the idea.
I already suggested this to the local staff at my Congressman's office. I also sent them a copy of my "Congressional Vote Score Card".
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2406579/posts
A couple of weeks after I did that his staff from DC called me about what it meant and why I composed it." (he is one of the good guys and I think he would honestly like telecommuting)
I wonder how much it'd cost to set up 50 telecommuting centers in, say the state capitol of each state for this purpose vs the cost of flying the congress and senators to and from DC along with the necessary budgets for residences et al.
Why not where they live. Set up a local office and only leave home for 1 or 2 times per year to go to DC.
I telecommuted for past 1-1/2 years, and liked it very much. Until the company I was working for began to close (105 year old company). I worked for them in 2 stints for just shy of 20 years.
I telecommuted for past 1-1/2 years, and liked it very much. Until the company I was working for began to close (105 year old company). I worked for them in 2 stints for just shy of 20 years.
I don't have anything in particular against them having it in their homes...but then you set up an office for each senator and congressman, and they have to make room in their homes for staff. But if it's in the state capital (or principle city) then they can all share an office area and it's easier to the IT folks to maintain.
I did not mean in their home, but in their in-state office. All of them that I know about maintain a staff somewhere in their district. Nothing wrong with that.
“Security” is the only real issue that I see with such a system. But there are ways.
I see. And yes, I imagine security would be the biggest issue...but it's pretty easily solvable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.