Posted on 10/25/2013 7:25:28 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Folks, if you have read me recently you know that I've said that you are the problem and that the reason this is true is that you won't go on strike, you won't picket DC and refuse to leave until the government stops stealing from you and debasing the currency, you won't reduce your spending and income to only that which provides necessities, and most of you go on to justify your behavior with "my kids (and/or family) deserve what I can provide."
You're fools and I'm going to prove it.
Further, I'm going to prove -- by arithmetic -- that if you follow the above path you will destroy yourself along with your children and grandchildren.
There were 108,592,000 people in the United States in the fourth quarter of 2011 who were recipients of one or more means-tested government benefit programs, the Census Bureau said in data released this week. Meanwhile, according to the Census Bureau, there were 101,716,000 people who worked full-time year round in 2011. That included both private-sector and government workers.
None of the people getting means-tested government benefits will ever vote to reduce them, nor vote for any politician that will reduce them.
But it's factually much worse than it first appears because federal government workers will not vote to fire themselves either, just as the 17th Amendment (ed: The worst thing to ever happen to this country) is inviolate because The Senate will never vote to fire itself.
So we must in fact subtract 21,880,000 from the full-time worker count.
In other words you're outvoted by 36%.
Does it make sense yet? This is not a small margin and it cannot be politically reversed because the margins are too high. Were the skew relatively small (and it looks small until you subtract out federal workers) you could potentially do so, because some people won't vote and you could "motivate the base." But note that with the federal workers out, and we're not subtracting the State workers, which also exist on this same largesse, you can't get there because this means nearly 40% of those receiving such benefits would have to stay home when reductions are proposed, and they never will.
As such you cannot vote your way out of this.
You cannot politically organize your way out of this.
You can't do it in the Democrat Party and you can't do it in the Republican Party. Nor can you do it in a third party.
Every single person who argues otherwise is an idiot or worse, a fraudster (if they have run the numbers above.)
Delusions persist because people don't examine the facts in detail. I recognize that I participated in attempting to politically change things for far too long because I did not look, in detail, at the math.
But I can no longer make any logical argument that political activism is useful in any way, shape or form. It is a waste of energy, time and money that I can expend elsewhere on something that brings me more joy, rather than tilting at windmills.
There is only one remaining peaceful way to change things: Withdraw your consent and thus intentionally but peacefully and lawfully destabilize the underpinning of the government debt market, thereby denying the government the means to continue screwing you, your children and grandchildren irrespective of the vote count.
The only other choices remaining are consenting to your own economic death, along with that of your children and grandchildren, or violence.
If you claim that you will "get yours" for "your kids" (or your spouse, or just yourself) you're deluding yourself as the odds are that (1) you will fail and (2) even if you "succeed" the victory will be both temporary and pyrrhic as you cannot overcome the voting block deficiency.
In short, read this Ticker again in light of the above mathematical facts.
Then act, or not, but the math doesn't care if you agree with it or not.
it’s ‘starving the monkeys’ tactic, nationwide.
great book overall, some parts i disagree with.
Learn to grow your own food, barter, and go on a partial if not full strike. This battle can be won. Look at Detroit. New York is about to get a lot worse. Let them rot in their own liberal filth. Those who see the light can move out.
It would be a step, but only effective for a short while because it would also trigger a "crisis" that would have them confiscating what you have and even changing the currency so it would no longer be useful. Precious metals become illegal as tender and a punishable crime. Weapon ownership will put you in the "family dog who barks" status and you will be shot merely because they know you have a weapon, even if you may not be carrying it at the time.
The People will eventually have to take to the streets or end up in the stockyards...
The message behind ‘Going Galt’ is that we can only be victims if we allow it, if we participate in it. The premise is starve the beast. Quit trying to succeed. Instead, gather your resources and only purchase to sustain.
Get your cash, the bulk of it anyway OUT of the banks. They can be shuttered in an electronic microsecond. Plus then, you can use it as necessary without an electronic trail.
I like Karl’s work. But even people on the dole or government don’t vote in lockstep. Besides even if I shirked my responsibilities and went to DC to protest, the political class will not care anyway. By Karl’s own writing we are a minority. The big cities are the country’s problem. Changing their voting patterns by 10-20% would change the dominant political philosophy. However, Karl has supported the dominant political philosophy of the last 100 years. His justified fear, dare I say terror, at the natural outcome of his political views is hopefully reflected by new voting patterns. As I see it there are only four possible ways out; 1) The citizens change their ways and vote responsibly. (VERY unlikely.) 2) A constitutional convention amends the constitution to eliminate DCs ability to impose their tyranny upon us. (Less likely than 1 and the government wouldn’t follow the newly revised constitution anyway.) 3) The armed forces, upholding their oath to the constitution, rise up and clean house restoring the constitutional republic. (More likely than 1 or 2 but still unlikely.) 4) Some event from within or without causes us to change our ways. (This is the only likely scenario.) Not pretty, but realistic IMHO. When the change comes the voting base must be reduced in size. Presently we are more of a corrupt democracy than a republic.
bkmk
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.