How capitalism has kept food on our plate
Capitalism, through competition and trade, has helped reduce the price of food drastically over the last 100 years. Food that was once luxury is now cheap and affordable for everyone. One such example is gelatin deserts. Until the founding of the Jell-O gelatin was a dessert almost exclusively for the wealthy class. At the time gelatin was made from leftover animal fat and sweetened. Only the rich could afford that much meat at the time and the fact that they could use enough fat to make gelatin was used to show off their wealth. Now, thanks to capitalism, gelatin desserts can be bought for $1.00 or less due to Jell-O and the generic brands of it.
Chicken was once considered a luxury dish too. It's hard to imagine either this or gelatin as being luxury because of how quick and easy they are to obtain, but they once were. Chicken was eaten by the poor too, but saved for special occasions and nothing more. So, what changed this and made chicken so cheap and easy to come by? The evil multinational corporation KFC is the reason why. Until KFC launched in Utah in the 1950s, Chicken was a commodity.
Meat in general has seen a reduction in prices because of fast food and chain stores. It used to be the only meat the poor could eat was venison which wasn't easy to come by. Nowadays a person can go down to their local Kroger and by a pack of ground beef for $5 or salami that costs $1 a pack. With a smaller government and more capitalism, things will only get cheaper.
Government control and it's harm
In school virtually everyone is taught about how Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" helped America in its darkest hour and kept millions of Americans hopeful during such troubled times. Many on the left have used this lie in order to push their agenda for more government regulation and tighter government control. Fact of the matter is that Roosevelt's New Deal prolonged the depression and only made it worse. During his administration after the New Deal was passed companies big and small were held down and not allowed to compete properly. The prime example being his edict on price control. Roosevelt's New Deal forced companies to charge a certain price for goods, all goods, and they weren't allowed to go higher nor lower than said price. the prices were dictated by big businesses that Roosevelt reached out to in order to figure out the prices that should be allowed. He didn't use small businesses or reach to them for advice, just the big ones. It led to problems because small businesses weren't allowed to go any lower in order to compete with the big business and many lost business because of it.
Governments have tried controlling the private sector time and time again. Instead of learning lessons from it they continue to do it. The recent economic downturn was due to such ignorance. The prime example is what the left referred to as “predatory lending” by banks when they loaned money to people that couldn’t pay them back. The left pounced on that and claimed these banks were intentionally doing this out of greed. The logical question is, why would banks intentionally lose money by lending to people that couldn’t pay them back if they were in fact that greedy? If it was truly greed, wouldn’t they have only lent to people that could pay them back? The answer is that it was in fact a law by the name of the Community Reinvestment Act. It is this, and not greed, that caused the problems we see today.
Of course the extreme leftists claim to hate monopolies and they claim to put up such laws and control in order to prevent monopolies. Ironically, in the end, they’re making the government the monopoly over the economy in order to prevent people from making money is a strange coincidence. Common sense lacks in the left, especially among Marxists. These people only live in a romanticized fantasy world about Marxism and refuse to see the world for what it truly is. In a lasseiz faire economy the people own the economy privately and control it through trade. In Marxism and socialism the people own the money in theory only. Fact of the matter is that if a company refuses to abide by the laws set forth by the court of popular opinion than they will refuse to do business with the companies that don’t act responsibly, making regulation pointless.
Going Green: Worse for environment than people realize
In 2008 there were reports of bats lungs exploding. What from? Wind turbines. As it turns out the popular green energy source is actually killing bats and many ecologists oppose using them. According to a report released by the US National Research Council in 2007 2500 bats were found dead near wind turbines from their lungs exploding. Do most leftists even know about this?
Most may not care that a few bats die from green energy, after all in the end green energy saves more animals that it kills right? We could just not do wind turbines and do solar panels instead. Well, apparently even solar panels attract and kill water insects which disrupts the ecosystem. Insects may seem small but they play a vital role to the food chain and help keep the balance of life stabilized.
So then, should we just forget about solar panels and wind turbines if they harm the environment and disrupt the food chain? Of course. Having green cars would do no harm to anything. At least, that's the impression that leftists would leave on you. Unfortunately even green fuel for cars is having a bad affect of the environment. As it turns out by the year 2020 orangutans will be extinct in the wild all in the name of going green. For the sake of biofuel an innocent creature is losing its habitat and will be extinct within a matter of 10 years. An entire specie gone in the name of going green.
The only thing that can be done in order to protect our earth is to not tamper with it. It sounds like a good idea to try to "go green" but unfortunately all that does is just leave humans in the role of playing god with our environment. At this rate it will be the environmentalists that will be the cause of widespread extinctions and create poverty among humans for no reason. The madness has to stop somewhere.
www.newscientist.com/article/dn14593-wind-turbines-make-bat-lungs-explode.html
Timothy Johnson Interview
First and foremost, how did you become a Republican?
I was getting older, reflected on my life and did some soul searching and thought, “Why are there more blacks in the Democrat party? Democrats founded the KKK, while the Republicans were founded as anti-slavery.” It was also my views on Christian values. Politics are in with religion, even our money says “In God we Trust.” There has always been a mixture of religion and politics. As a Christian, I also believe in free market enterprise.
How do you feel about conservatives being labeled “racists” by the extreme left?
Well, I’ll give an example: People say people can come from a different side of town, tow different high schools, and two different churches and be friends. When you add politics into the mix, it isn’t the same. Obama can’t be criticized by whites because they are racist if they do. I heard someone say that it was whites that elected Obama, not blacks.
Why should, in your opinion, African Americans support any conservative ideologies in general?
I’m going to teach you something. Conservatism was against Jim Crowe Laws and lynching. It’s about traditionalism. Now, I never claimed to be a conservative, I just say I believe in the American traditions and the principles it was founded on. A lot of people forget the Republican Party wasn’t founded by Reagan; it was the party of Civil Rights.
How has the Frederick Douglass foundation helped the conservative movement amongst African Americans and what does it do to help?
The key thing is to educate, not draw people in. Most people believe the Democrat Party was for liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but it wasn’t. What Glenn Beck and people like me are doing is to educate and teach people the truth. We are part of being a leader.
I’ve read quotes by you in the Chicago Tribune where you were called things such as “oreo” and “Uncle Tom.” How does that make you feel?
When I’m called Uncle Tom I say “thank you for reading the book.” Being called and Uncle Tom doesn’t offend me. When people say these things it’s used to hurt people, and it proves how ignorant people can be.
How do you feel about Fox News and what it’s done for the conservative movement?
I believe they’ve done a good job information wise. Because they’re on the side of the right they have to work harder though. I don’t see any black anchors on there or enough diversity. Blacks make up 13% of the population so about 1/9 of the anchors should be black. Not just bring in the token black guy like Juan when they need it. It just makes people think the right isn’t for blacks when they see that.
What do you feel is Obama’s idea or agenda for America?
I don’t know, I’m still working on that one. Obama continues to allude clarity.
What is Timothy Johnson’s idea of America?
I would have done things differently. I feel Obama didn’t really bring Americans together. He hasn’t shown transparency, he is aggressive when pushing through his agenda. I would be clear, make sure the economy is robust, bring us pride and remind Americans we’ve gone through some tough things and rose up. Little things like that.
How well do you think these people are doing:
Michael Steel?
I think he’s doing a great job and I met him in DC and he enlightened me to how things work behind the scenes. I don’t agree with everything he says but support his effort.
Hillary Clinton:
I think she’s Hillary. No faults either way. I wish she would push back on Obama and do things better with Israel though.
Nancy Pelosi:
I think she sucks and we need to get her out of office.
Barack Obama:
His polling numbers are where they should be. He delivered hope and change, but it was the hope and change people didn’t want.
The Frederick Douglass Foundation is a foundation reaching black conservatives and branching out into other states. For more information visit http://www.frederickdouglassfoundation.com.Athens: A Warning From History
From 527 BCE to 510 BCE Athens was ruled by a tyrant by the name of Hippias. Hippias was wildly unpopular and was overthrown from his position as dictator in 510 BCE by an Athenian aristocrat by the name of Cleisthenes with the aid of the Spartan army. Upon his rule Cleisthenes set up a system of government that was called δημοκρατία, "the rule of the people." Culture in Athens flourished. Literacy went up drastically, arts were practiced and improved, the theater became a pass time for the Athenians, and she became well known for the schools and philosophers that it had. For 170 years, with the exception of a few interruptions, Athens democratic form of government was mostly stable. It had come to an end in the year 338 BCE with the conquest of Alexander the Great. Athens spent 50 years as a military superpower, possibly having the most powerful army in the world at the time, so how did it fall from grace and allow herself to become conquered and its legacy shattered like that?
In the year 499 BCE Athens sent troops to Asia Minor and stirred up trouble for the Persian Empire in an attempt to liberate the Greek cities under the yoke of the Persian Empire. Nearly 10 years later in 490 BCE a large troupe of Persian soldiers were crushed by a smaller group of Athenian soldiers at the Battle of Marathon. Another 10 years later an all out war between Athens and the Persian Empire broke out. Despite having the city of Athens itself burnt down and its Parthenon destroyed Athens still managed to win the war with crushing defeats at sea and on land. In another stroke of luck the Athens had discovered a silver mine in its territory making it all the richer and allowing it to rebuild the city and an even more grand Parthenon. In the name of protection, the Athenians established the Delian League in order to help the city states in the Aegean from the Persian Empire, or so it claimed.
Athens built a stronghold on the cities in the Delian League and forced Democracy on them. The idea was "this is how we do it, and you must do it too" ran rampant in the minds of the Athenians. Through force they established democracies in its league instead of through example. They had invaded Egypt in order to save it from the Persian Empire which failed. They had put out military expeditions to establish democracies and be the police force of the Mediterranean. It was this that made them wildly unpopular and eventually led to the Peloponnesian War against Sparta. Sparta had one the war and nearly abolished democracy forever with the rule of 30 Tyrants that lasted for a brief period before democracy was restored. Despite being able to liberate itself from Sparta Athens was crippled and had less power. It remained an intellectual capital through out the Roman Empire, but never regained the riches it once had.
It is through this example that we know what not to do in the future. In order to have a good standing in the world we must focus on our own problems and not the problems of the world. In the eyes of most neocons the best thing to do is to invade countries like Iraq and force them to set up a democracy. The country of Iraq and other nations having rule of the people through democracy is great but it should be done by example. We will find ourselves in the same position Athens once did if we continue down this path. Despite challenging empires and becoming popular from doing it we have found ourselves setting up leagues all the same and invading other countries which has given our nation a black eye.
Don't Raise IL taxes
A cry for higher taxes in the state of Illinois, something some see as a good thing. Unfortunately Draconian tax increases will only do the state of Illinois more harm. Everywhere taxes are increased jobs become less available and people find themselves buying less because they can not afford to buy as much. That means less revenue, but some people don't understand that.
These people are mostly calling higher taxes on the rich due to their lack of understanding of economics. There's a school of thought in the world that says the rich have a limitless supply of money and will do fine if they're taxed more because all they do is let their money sit around like the greedy people they are. As righteous as that remark sounds it couldn't be further from the truth.
The fact of the matter is that the rich, in most cases aren't actually rich but business owners who's income goes to pay for their workers and to keep up maintenance, don't have a limitless supply and don't let their money sit around doing nothing.
The reason why it seems that way is because they know not to spend it just because they have it because the future may require that money to invest in things to stimulate the economy. It's the rich that create wealth that eventually finds it way to the lower class through private sector jobs. Private sector jobs account for a vast majority of jobs in the US, as it should.
The fact of the matter is people need to pay less taxes so they can buy more, businesses need less regulation and taxes so they can sell their products at lower prices and create more jobs, and there needs to be a separation of business and state so big business lobbyists don't have any authority over the laws that are passed in the US.
What most people don't realize about higher taxes on the "rich," which is in quotation marks because not all rich people are actually rich but have the visage of being rich due to the fact they own a small business, is that the actual rich are the only ones that can afford these taxes and the smaller business can't. When taxes go up on the "rich" it creates an unleveled playing field that creates an advantage for big businesses that can afford them and can buy in bulk in order to sell their products at lower prices than the smaller businesses. It's why Joe's Burger Joint goes out of business quicker than a fast food chain because Joe can't buy in bulk in order to have the food come cheaper like McDonalds, a corporation that can afford it, can.
As much as people want to blaim this on the free market and use it as proof that capitalism fails the fact of the matter is that when a government favors certain businesses and creates an unleveled playing field the market is not free. Hence the cry for a seperation of business and state. If the private sector and small businesses flurish than there would be less of a need for the expensive government services because it would be handled more in the private sector. Then there would be no need for tax cuts.
Support lower taxes and liberty. Give the little guy a chance by lowering taxes.
Fight Like Socrates
“I do not know, men of Athens, how my accusers affected you; as for me, I was almost carried away in spite of myself, so persuasively did they speak. And yet, hardly anything of what they said is true. Of the many lies they told, one in particular surprises me, namely that you should be careful not to be deceived by an accomplished speaker like me.”
The words of Socrates as he opened his trial in Athens after being accused of corrupting the youth. Socrates went on to say how he wasn’t a great speaker at all, and went onto defend himself with boldness through nothing more than the justice of his own words. Socrates was known for being a man who questioned everyone and showed them their mistakes and ignorance. He never tried to do it, it just happened that way because most people do in fact not know the facts behind what they are saying, but rather they say it meaninglessly because they were told these things. Socrates himself was a man who thought himself wise for admitting that he knew nothing and was always eager to learn more from the people he talked to. Socrates set a path for obtaining wisdom in western civilization that is only recently being broken by shame, ignorance, and so called “ethics” that do more harm than good.
In today’s America, there are many Socrates who question authority and the world around them, but like Socrates are mocked for it. Socrates is known today for being a wise man, one of the wisest in history, but during his life was mostly mocked and scoffed. He walked and continued what he did with no shame despite his critics opposition. In today’s America, the Socrates’ of the US face the same persecution by politicians for questioning what is going on and the state of thinking these people have. Socrates took the abuse that was heaped at him and still carried his sense of humility and his boldness to his deathbed. Socrates was a man of courage who encouraged others in the citizen body to do what he does, to question.
In America today, people who question authority and defend what they know is right, the Socrates’, often the butt of cruel jokes used to blaspheme them to the point of shame. Many in the media mock people who believe in the US and it’s constitution and portray them as ignorantly as they possibly can. Socrates himself faced these same problems for the same reasons. He said in regards to Aristophanes portrayal of him in his Clouds:
“What is most absurd in all this is that one cannot even know or mention their names unless one of them is a writer of comedies. Those who maliciously and slanderously persuaded you-who also, when persuaded themselves and persuaded others-all those who are most difficult to deal with: one cannot bring one of them into court or refute him; one must simply fight within the shadows, as it were, in making ones defense, and cross-examine when no one answers. I want you to realize too that my accusers are of two kinds: those who have accused me recently, and the old ones I mention; and to think that I must first defend myself against the latter, for you have also heard their accusations first, and to a much greater extent than the more recent.
“Very well then, men of Athens. I must surely defend myself and attempt to uproot you from your minds in so short a time the slander that has resided there so long. I wish this may happen, if it is in any way better for you and me, and that my defense may be successful, but I think this is very difficult and I am fully aware of how difficult it is. Even so, let the matter proceed as the god may wish, but I must obey the law and make my defense.”
The trials and tribulations Socrates faced in his time are no different than the ones faced today by seekers of the truth. They are scoffed, the center of scrutiny and abuse, and they are the butt of almost every joke. We must question with boldness and remember that no one throughout history who is perceived as great thinkers has gone without these kinds of scrutiny that are faced today by people attempting the truth. We must fight and remember that we are not alone in the annals of history as people who were portrayed as ignorant by the people they were questioning. Some of these people have went down in history as some of the greatest and most well respected thinkers of all time. We must continue to fight and fight with humility and understanding that we will be ridiculed in the process. We must also remember that we are the intellectual heirs of Socrates and must continue our quest and keep fighting. If we continue to fight than we will most certainly go down in history as great thinkers.
Liberal Lies and Myths
Myth: Pure capitalism is based on greed and exploitation of workers by the rich.
Fact:No matter what the system of government, there will always be competition and work. The idea that employers are exploiting the workers is absurd. First of all if a person doesn't like the job they have they can always search for a new job. Secondly, what about the fact the government is exploiting tax payer money to fund projects that don't benefit the tax payer even remotely? Forcefully taking tax payer money to fund something they don't care about is immoral and exploitation at it's finest.
Myth: The poor are getting poorer while the rich are getting richer. The income gap proves it.
Fact:The income gap only proves the rich are getting richer. A close reexamination of the charts shows that the poor are getting richer and the middle class have more buying power when government operates at it's smallest. The poor will only get richer when the rich get richer.When the rich get richer they higher more competent workers that are innovative and are able to come up with products that make our lives easier. The rich getting richer has brought us:
iPods, internet, PC's, high definition televisions, and sports cares.
Myth:Social programs and progressives have done nothing but help the poor and anyone who wants these programs abolished want children to starve and nothing more.
Fact: Socialism is a failed 20th century thought experiment that people are too stubborn to admit is a failure.If social security, welfare, and other such programs did work, then no one would need them anymore. If they worked like some people claim,then their use would cease to exist because people were able to get off of them. Fact of the matter is more people rely on welfare today than ever before. That's speaking per capita. Also, if I wanted children to starve I would promote socialism. I think people who make that claim forget that kids that live in countries with a freer market are less likely to starve than those that don't. Free markets have helped poverty levels decrease drastically in Chile, China, and India.
Myth: Today's complex world makes it too difficult for people to govern themselves, therefore they need a third party to govern them for them.
Fact:That's a spit in the face of everyone. No one is too ignorant to govern themselves. Moreover, people don't need any laws that "save them from themselves." What other people do isn't the business of anyone but themselves. There should be NO laws dictating the way they dress, eat,or what they smoke just because you don't like it. If you think KFC is unhealthy, don't eat there. No one is forced to eat there and it doesn't need to be abolished(for anyone who thinks this is a joke,there really are people trying to abolish fast food restaurants because they think they're too unhealthy. Even if they are, there's no need to make them illegal because people are fully capable of governing themselves).
Myth: Because of the free market system, people are being brainwashed by television commercials produced by companies to buy their products.
Fact: No one is being brainwashed.
I want to stop it there, but I have to go one. Fact of the matter is,most commercials fail to attract viewers because most people use the commercial breaks to do other things. Also, if this claim were made about anything else, like the government trying to brainwash us, it would be labeled a conspiracy theory and made into a joke. It should be labeled that way, but also should this thought.
(again, for anyone that thinks this is a joke, Google commercials brainwash people)
Functioning a Proper Republic
Contrary to popular belief, the US is not a democracy, the US is a republican democracy. Being a republican democracy, the populous votes on a person who represents their voice an opinion. If the US was a democracy, considering it's size, the nation would have fallen long ago. A democracy, that is to say a direct democracy, would have too many conflicts of interest in a society with many different people with different modes of thinking. Population influx in such a society would also damage the process and make a direct democracy function. While a direct democracy sounds fair, it's only stable in small communities. The solution to this, and to allow the common people to get their voices heard, is through a republican democracy. In such a system, the people still have a democratic process that isn't hindered by conflicts of interest in the population. A republican democracy may be the perfect form of government, but even it is doomed to fail if it is run improperly.
All people are capable of running for a political position in the republic. However, not all people should run for position in a republic, that is to say unless they're well versed on the constitution of the state and the union. Understanding which laws violate the rights of the constitution and which ones benefit is necessary to passing proper laws. Perverting the constitution of state and union to fit the idea of a bill or law is immoral and unjustifiable and should not be done. A great amount of respect to the constitutions should be shown for it provides the best liberties given, and not false liberties as said by some people. Protection of rights is not a false liberty, and should not be addressed as such.
Knowing the constitution alone is not the only way in which a member should base his candidacy on. A person who is interested in running should also be knowledgeable in ethical and social issues as well, and should be open minded and examine them from all angles. From there the republican should determine which side of the position that should taken on said issue which benefits the constituents of their district. If the position is not popular the candidate should try passively try explaining why that side of the issue is the one they decided to take. If the candidate can not convince their constituents that the issue is relevant, they should vote against it provided the case isn't the majority taking away the rights of a minority.
Ethical issues and political philosophy go hand in hand. A person running for office should also be knowledged in political philosophy. Studying philosophy helps sharpen one's knowledge and rhetoric skills, and is an important part of politics. Understanding the wisdom of the ancestors of the US' political system and other political systems also shows one how to develop their own thinking skills. The wisdom passed on from philosophers should be taken and developed on to advance the future. If the words of the dead die out, then surely society will die with them.
The final mention of importance in running a healthy republic is to keep the executive branch out of the system. Over recent years, presidents and governors have interfered with the lawmaking process in state capitals and Washington D.C. and have only hurt the process. The role of the executive is not to draw up or make laws, it's to simply address the union and give speeches. The president should also address foreign affairs and play the, not an, active role in diplomacy. The role of the governor varies from state to state, but in Illinois the role of the governor is to appoint administrators, propose budgets to the General Assembly once a year, and to grant pardons and call for special elections. The role of both is to also act as commander in chief of the militaries. Acting in the role of law making for these becomes a distraction, and all such powers should be left directly to the legislative branches. This is how to keep up a healthy republic, and such words should be taken seriously.
Altruism
The gift of sharing and helping one’s fellow human is something that has existed as long as humans have, and some argue even longer. These unselfish acts are known as “altruism” and are a trait evolved into many creatures, including homo sapiens. Altruism is thought to have been evolved as a form of looking out for the greater good of a community or group. An example being a fowl making a loud noise when it spots a predator. Even though this fowl puts itself in more danger, it still alerts the other fowls in the process to help them avoid danger. The reason for this is as simple as the fowl does this because it’s been bred and evolved to alert it’s brethren in hopes of having the favor return. The comparison to this and humans and goodwill should be drawn here, for even though the example given has little to do with a post gatherer-hunter society, it still is an example of good will expressed for the sake of the greater good. It is a great quality evolved into creatures because it helps insure survival for a length of time.
It’s in every human’s best interest to share and give as much as they can on behalf of the community. While this shouldn’t be forced onto humans through a series of taxes encouraged by greed and envy, it should be encouraged for one person to go out of their way to help another. The reason is simple, if person a lends his or her shirt to person b, hopefully person b would do the same for person a when person a is in the same predicament person b was in prior to this. It’s in everyone’s best interest to give as much as one can out of his or her own volition, it also can’t be stressed enough to give to one who can’t give back due to their lack of resources. The reason for this is just as simple, for just as person a gives their shirt to person b in hopes of getting something in return if they were in the same situation, so should person a give just as willingly to person c in the chance that person b sees it and is willing to do the same for person a in case he or she found themselves in said situation.
Though people should give and to an extent expect back in one way or another, it should not be taken too far. One should not give simply to use it as an excuse to get back later. Not all people are capable of giving, so it’s not in the best interest of anyone to expect someone in this situation to give or to force them to give through a series of taxes, i.e. state sales taxes or city sales taxes, in order to fund a false greater good. It is for the reason of altruism that people should pay less taxes, as to free them up to help them manage their supplies better and to give the less fortunate who pay taxes a break. There will always be people who take advantage of the altruistic will of humans, but these people should not be punished or mocked, though they should be led by example. It’s not in the place of anyone to force another to pay for their own misfortune no matter the circumstance.
Without self restraint, altruism will fail. While people should be entitled to buy things of luxury as much as their income allows, they shouldn’t go so far as to solely spend their income on luxuries and their own necessities while ignoring the greater good. Many people in a socialist society do such a thing, as they do in a society bogged down with many socialist programs. Without the feel or need for self discipline with one’s finances, a person would be more interested in looking out for themselves instead of participating in the act of goodwill and humanity. With too many taxes for people to pay, this is expected because a person is going to be more inclined to lookout for themselves above the community because they usually don’t see anything outside the realm of themselves and taxes. Likewise, this same person is likely to complain about paying the taxes and use it as an excuse for not participating in altruism. For this reason all people need to be free to do as they please with their income and pay less taxes, to encourage and learn what good will is and learn better self restraint and responsibility. For it’s only in a society that learns from mistakes as opposed to the society that gets bailed out will it succeed. Through self restraint, self discipline, and learning can a society prosper and develop into a better tomorrow.
