Mr. Kerry’s Logical Mistake

I think this blindingly obtuse statement by the oaf from Massachusetts is referred to as a non sequitur.  What a brilliant display of deduction:  A follower of Jesus should support the Democrat party health care plan because Jesus didn’t discriminate between the destitute and the affluent when performing miracles of healing.  Let’s see how this works out:

• MAJOR PREMISE:  Jesus healed people from all levels of income without discriminating
• MINOR PREMISE:  We are followers of Jesus
• CONCLUSION:  Therefore we should support the Democrat party health care plan

Aristotle would be so proud.  Here is an argument presented by a sitting U.S. Senator to college students.  It is testament to the fact that nothing is worse than incompetence accompanied by hubris.  All this could be dismissed as just another example of how desperate radicals are to find support for their politics, but I fear it’s worse than that.

The Really Scary Part

First, what’s really scary is that Mr. Kerry finds the argument persuasive – demonstrating why he is a liberal.  We know for sure that he thought it persuasive enough to say to college students, so wouldn’t a normal person fear that some student would point out the stupidity of Mr. Kerry’s string of incoherent statements presented as argument?  Wouldn’t that be embarrassing?  Why risk it?  Because he believes he actually said something profound.

In addition, Mr. Kerry knew that a news reporter was in the audience and would probably report on the speech.  apparently thinks that this level of ignorance is appropriate fare for college students.  This is a man who considers himself sufficiently intelligent that he deserves to sit in the U.S. Senate and make laws for the rest of us to live by.  Growing research shows, “that incompetence deprives people of the ability to recognize their own incompetence.”  Mr. Kerry’s performance  at Gordon College in Wenham, Massachusetts (as elsewhere) proves the point.

Mr. Kerry’s Theological Mistake

Like all people who pretend to be real Christians, Mr. Kerry’s understanding of the Bible is limited to occasionally looking up cool online Bible quotes, and purposely misunderstanding the Gospel.

God’s demand that Christians be charitable and hospitable deals with our responsibility to be charitable and hospitable to other Christians.  Neither Jesus nor any other New Testament figure said that Christians should support any of Caesar’s efforts to provide healthcare for everyone in the domain.

Mr. Kerry makes the same mistake all people of liberal political theory wedded to liberal Christianity make – they confuse the Kingdom of God with the Kingdoms of this world.  They – not faithful conservative Christians – are the ones who attempt to impose their version of Christianity on the people.  They are the ones who want to impose morality – a selective morality of their own choosing – on the people.  They care nothing about morality.  They promote gay marriage, protect nude dancing establishments, force Priests to violate their religious practices regarding birth control and abortion; but get super holy, and sanctimonious about morality when it comes to health care.

They seek to use the only Begotten Son of God, the Savior, as a political tool to strike reverence in the hearts of His true followers so they will betray their instincts.  This is so much easier than actually taking Jesus seriously, obeying Him,  and seeking to follow Him.

Let them be accursed.

It was created this way because the people forming it had real life experience with a hegemonic, central governmental power – that of King George III.  The Parliament and the King instituted whatever they wanted – even if the people didn’t want it.  (This may sound vaguely familiar.)

This exercise of the power of the few over the many has been the experience of all humans from the beginning.  Dictators, Kings, Pharaohs, Emperors, and military Generals have forced the common citizens to comply with the leader’s vision of what was the good society in every corner of the world in every time throughout history.

The brief experiments at democracy and republicanism during the existence of the Greek city states are not a real exception.  Yes, citizens had input on the influence and structure of government, but in almost every case, there were many more slaves than citizens living in those cities.  Slaves had no input whatsoever, and could not vote, so government by consent of the governed wasn’t practiced at all.

Following the Dark Ages, the influence of Christian ideas about the central value and importance of individuals began to chip away at the concept of the divine rights of Kings.  Having to listen to the concerns of noblemen and barons and Pope Innocent III diminished the power of the central government in England.

The major liberty sought by those who finally left the British Isles and parts of Europe for the Americas was freedom of religion.  They came to these shores and created – over a couple of centuries – a republican, federalist system designed to forever constrain the power of the central government from gaining increased hegemony over individuals.  This is why the Constitution is a document of enumerated powers; the founders created it so the federal government could not do anything other than what the Constitution stated specifically it could do.

Unfortunately, at this period in our history the Constitution has long been disfigured beyond recognition by political manipulation on the part of Representatives, Senators, and Presidents; but most of all by the federal court system including the Supreme Court.  For some 80 years our republic has existed on the accumulated goodwill, and  moral and economic capitol of previous generations.  Not that many lately have not pursued moral and economic success, but only that our effort has been increasingly seen as immoral and bigoted by those who desire to return power to the king.

With the recent overstepping of our Congress at the urging President Obama imposing their vision of what your your life should be, we have indeed returned to government without the consent of the governed.  The imposition of what the few believe to be ‘good for us’ rather than continuing the concept of freedom for citizens probably puts any return to Constitutional federalism and the Bill or Rights out of reach.  The Democrats have just denied you significant parts of your Bill of Rights.

Mr. Obama has said in the past that the U.S. Constitution is an impediment to his vision. He has stated, “…the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf.”  With those words, Mr. Obama reveals that he sees the U.S. Constitution as a roadblock to imposing the laws, rules, regulations, and benefits he wants to implement.

It also shows that his vision for the country is entirely different from what the founders created it to be, and what most Americans think it is.  He wants the government to have powers the framers denied to it.  He wants to take powers of freedom away from the people and give it back to the government as if our War for Independence to end coercive powers of government never occurred.  He does not believe in the divine rights of Kings, but it is clear that Mr. Obama believes in the divine rights of Presidents.  Because he believes in his right to force you to live the way he wants you to live rather than the way you want to live.

By his willing and open overthrow of  the U.S. Constitution with its prohibitions on any activity by government other than what is explicitly permitted, he reveals his belief that he should be free to choose for you, and you should not.  Under this regime, the government does not owe you independence from its coercive powers to control your speech, your economic welfare, your freedom to assemble with those you choose; no - in Obama’s world it owes you retirement, healthcare, income of a certain level, and so on.  This means, of course, that it will have to confiscate money from other people in order to hand out these new ‘positive rights.’

Mr. Obama has also been quite open about his intentions of taking money away from some people and giving it to others – some special people he personally wants to support.  He lamented the direction of the civil rights movement because they followed the Constitution; because they had “…a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.”

By “redistributive” he means that he sees wealth earned by those who sacrificed, denied themselves, and worked hard to accumulate as not belonging to them at all.  Rather, it actually belongs to the government; in his view, your wealth is a government commodity.  It is a commodity that the government has the right to “redistribute”  to the people Mr. Obama sees as more deserving of it than you.  Certainly in his mind, those who earned it and sacrificed to accumulate it are not deserving of it, else he would not use the coercive powers of government to take it away from them so he can give it to people he deems worthy of it.  And so the concept of “private property” dies with most of the remaining parts of the Constitution under President Obama.

There is no longer any doubt about what he meant when he said just prior to his inauguration that he was just 5 days away from fundamentally transforming America. Forcing us to pay taxes without our consent, forcing us to purchase a product from a government controlled entity against our will, denying us the right to enter into contracts with people of our choosing for purposes of healthcare – all of this and more is breathtaking.  We have just witnessed a coup d’état sans violence.  The Constitution was written in order to protect us from people like Mr. Obama.  Now it is gone.  The smiling, benevolent, suffocating bureaucracies he is imp0sing are no less coersive than the Politbureaus, Oligarchies, and Star Chambers we have seen elsewhere.  Denying you freedom is denial if it comes with a fist or a smile.

It only remains to ask if you are willing to throw them out of office before we lose another Constitutional right – the right to vote.  This one is no more or less sacred than the others we have already lost.

Well.  The Democrats have spent enough of your tax dollars to purchase 60 votes to bring the Senate health care bill to the floor for debate.  Odds are it will cost hundreds more $millions to pass it.  Too bad the president is busy lecturing Afghanistan on corruption to deal with it here.

We know that the health care bill isn’t about improving health care; lowering the cost of health care, or improving delivery of health care.  We know this, because the legislation does none of these.  

It’s not about improving health care 

The best health care system in the world is about to be junked.  Soon it will be run like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Amtrak. 

Bubba says the one who pays the fiddler calls the tune.  That means neither you nor your doctor will be deciding anything  about your health care.  Bureaucrats will be telling doctors what they can and can’t do.  Standard of care indeed; a much lower standard of care.  Spread the misery.  

Government employees making your health decisions: think incompetent, obnoxious, factotums with power – the Transportation Security Administration Agents at the airport looking out for your “air safety”.  Think IRS agents helping to insure you are doing your part to preserve liberty.  Soon all doctors and hospitals as extensions of the government will be delivering the same friendly, high-quality service for your breast and prostate exams.   

Yeah, you can keep your doctor.  If he’s still practicing medicine in the asylum. 

It’s not about lowering the cost of health care 

The argument is that we are spending too much on health care because those with health insurance have to pay for the cost of those who don’t have the insurance just go to the emergency room.  So the Democrat Party’s answer to this problem is to require those who have insurance pay for the health insurance of those who would otherwise just go to the emergency room.  For liberals the problem IS the solution!  Neat. 

In order to accomplish this brilliant maneuver they want to create more than 100 new boards, and give government employees access to all your medical information.  (We know how careful government employees are with your private information: remember Dan the Plumber, remember the Pentagon Papers, remember CIA leaks on the front page of the New York Times?)  Give bureaucrats not doctor’s decision-making power over who gets which procedures, and spend another $2 trillion over the next ten years.  What could go wrong? 

It’s not about covering everyone with health insurance 

Mr. Obama says he can cut $425 billion in waste and fraud in Medicare over the next 10 years.  Hooah!  Let’s do that now.  That would save us $42.5 billion a year. Then let’s add the $54 billion a year we can save through tort reform limiting junk medical malpractice awards making the total available now to $96,500 billion.  A year. 

Simple math; divide $96,500 million a year by the highest possible estimate of people in the U.S. without health insurance – 35,000,000 – and you get $2,757 per person.  This amounts to $11,028 to pay for health insurance for a family of 4 covering every individual in the United States said to be without health insurance.  How much will this cost in addition to what we already pay?  Zip.  Why not do it this way?  Because the Democrat health care plans are not about lowering the cost of health care.  They would rather spend a couple $trillion for other reasons.  It’s all about control. 

Government-provided health care – the loss of freedom

Rationing will happen because the government will budget a specific amount for health care services; and then in order to approximate the budget they will deny, delay, and dilute medical services based on their budget, not yours. 

We have already seen how a government panel will use the new Democrat health care legislation – if passed and signed by the President – as a means to denying access to health care; they recommended delaying access to mammograms for more than a decade, then using the diagnostic tool only half as frequently as in the past. 

Screening for breast cancer is a preventative measure; denying and delaying it INSURES more cases of breast cancer.  Denial or delay of treatment is bad enough, but taking steps to guarantee more women get cancer is just too much.  But there’s a reason for it.

More cases of breast cancer and more deaths, means that by killing off more people the Democrats will save hundreds of $millions on health care now; and hundreds of $billions later by not having to provide Medicare and Social Security for so many people.  A twofer money saving tactic.  This is how liberals do cost-cutting. 

Rationing of health care in the U.S. will become an issue of bureaucratic fiat rather than personal economic decision-making. 

The Democrat plan removes choice.   You cannot choose what you want so it fits your own situation; and you do not have the choice to purchase only what you can afford.  Nor can you choose to use any procedure available to treat your diagnosis.  

Possible consequences 

Since the government will be in control of what is covered, they may choose not to pay for the birth of Down Syndrome babies.  It’s their choice, not yours. 

Physicians and hospitals will have no choice but to comply with what the bureaucrats want because the government writes the checks.  Doctors apparently will keep the choice to go into another profession.  The doctors who would stay in such an enterprise for a long term will probably come only from the same bottom 20% of the graduating class as public schoolteachers.  Probably produce the same result as well. 

Delay PSA tests, deny physical examinations, deny coverage for certain prescriptions that are too expensive, control which citizens get fined or jailed for non-compliance, raise the amount of the fines, raise the taxes on ‘Cadillac’ health plans, lower the amount that constitutes a ‘Cadillac’ plan and so on.  God, please let the fools who think someone else is going to pay for this survive long enough to lament the day of their folly. 

The Second Amendment will be controlled by the health care apparatchiks at the National Institutes of Health, because guns can cause damage to people, and therefore is a health issue.

What you eat will also come under the control of bureaucrats, and these decisions will be made politically.  Just wait until the international agri-business corporations get to work on various Representatives and Senators to set out what constitutes a good diet.  They will be in the position of forbidding certain products for sale; and placing taxes on stuff they don’t like.  Got to look out for your health, you know. 

They already do as much as the law allows – tobacco taxes fund all kinds of things the government wants to do.  They don’t want people to quit smoking; they just want to use the industry as a money generating machine to fund what the Democrats want to impose.  Got to keep the money coming in.  Next it will be soft drinks, whole milk, ice cream, coffee.  See part two of this series to look at the kinds of taxes the government already imposes on your freedom. 

The kind of car or truck you drive will become a health care issue.  How fast you can drive, and where.  Air quality will be a health care issue meaning that the backyard barbecue will alternatively be taxed, or forbidden altogether. 

You can expect that government inspectors will be arranging to come into your home to insure safety.  If they’re going to pay for it, they have the right to control it.  They will be checking your stairs for safety, how hot the water heater is, the deck, cleaning chemicals – all of it.  Think of it as your personal visit by an OSHEA bureaucrat.  This has already begun in England; expect it here when the Democrats get the control over your life they have been seeking since FDR. 

The government will control your fireplace, and your dryer exhaust, how warm or cool you can keep your home, how large it can be, and how it is insulated – all health issues you understand. 

So what how much you weigh, and how much of the health care budget you consume will all be controlled by the federal government.  Goodbye state and local government. 

What will it really cost (besides $trillions)? 

Consider: when the federal government was able to predict the cost of anything?  They can’t tell in advance how much it will cost to purchase a toilet seat, a hammer, a jet, a boat – nothing.  When they have undertaken to set the expected cost of any piece of legislation, they have been universally wrong – always.   

Guess – did they estimate the cost too high, or too low?  Silly question.  It depends on what they are predicting.  If it’s bad news, the estimates are low, if it’s good news, the estimates are always too high. “Unemployment (may rise to 8% from 6% without our Stimulus plan.”  Actually it rose from 6% to 10.2% so far with the Stimulus plan.  Do you actually think they would lie?  A crucial question is: why would any single person in the U.S. believe government estimates about how much health care will cost. 

Lyndon Johnson began the War on Poverty trying to convince us he could end the problem.  Today in means tested poverty programs including Social Security and Medicare amount to $17,939 per person below the poverty level.  This would be $64,756 for a family of four to eliminate poverty.  The aggregate money spent on poverty programs since the 1960’s is $15.9 trillion; and we still have the poor with us.  Do you believe the government’s estimates of the cost of health care? 

It will cost more; it will do less; it will take control of almost every aspect of your individual life.  Why would you permit them to do this to you?

The federal government alone has more than 8,000 individual forms. The amount of time citizens spend completing government forms has increased 1000% since 1981.  The so-called Stimulus Bill passed earlier this year alone has given rise to hundreds of new forms.  Think “Cash for Clunkers.”

The most used federal government form is Standard Form 152, the “Request for Clearance or Cancellation of a Standard Optional Form,” which must be completed to create or modify any of the other forms.  Standard Form 152 must have the name of a designated “Standard and Optional Forms Liaison Representative” and an alternate.  Since the form to create or modify all other forms can be complicated, it comes with a 17-page instruction booklet; and “should be turned in to the General Services Administration 60 days prior to planned implementation. ”

Thought you would want to know.  I don’t know why I thought that.  Sleep well tonight.

Our freedom to start new businesses; to enjoy central heating and air conditioning; to continue to enjoy personal financial liberty, and to continued employement are in danger – all because of oppressive new government regulations.  You may be surprised to know that a molecule essential to all plant and animal life on earth is now considered by the Obama EPA as dangerous.  

The Environmental Protection Agency has now officially made an “endangerment finding” on CO2.  This permits the Obama Administration to take command and control of this molecule by means of Clean Air Act regulations.  EPH Chief Lisa Jackson says that the regulations would only apply to 10,000 facilities in the U.S. that discharge 25,000 tons of CO2 or more per year.  These are utility and refining companies along with some manufacturing facilities.  It’s important to note that the limit of 25,000 tons is completely arbitrary because the Clean Air Act regulations state that an “endangerment finding” requires regulation of any facility that discharges more than 250 tons – not the 25,000 Ms. Jackson announced.  As a result, all human activity; public and personal will come under the control of the federal government.  This is not overstatement.  Consider that energy is required for virtually all human activity: the temperature of our home and workplace, how we are permitted to get to work, where we work; whether we can own an outboard motor, ski, travel; the food in our grocery store and the clothes on our back will all come under federal scrutiny. 

How will it be implemented?

This means that many farms, hospitals, schools, hotels, churches and small businesses will be required to implement “best available control technology” to avoid federal fines.  The number of facilities covered would be over 40,000 – there are 300 today – and facilities requiring EPA construction permits would rise from 14,000 to 6.1 million; these numbers come from the EPA itself.  Further they say that this is “an unprecedented increase” and says it will create years of delay that will “impede economic growth by precluding any type of source – whether it emits GHGs [greenhouse gasses] or not – from construction or modifying for years after its business plan contemplates.” (Emphasis mine) No mention on how this would impact Mr. Obama’s plan to increase employment. 

The ostensible reason to control the emission of CO2 is to “save the earth.”  That is; the earth is warming critically because of Carbon dioxide which humanity is creating at unsustainable levels and governments of the world must immediately slow then reverse the amount of CO2 produced by humanity.  This is not only a hallucination, it is a lie.  Revelations during the past week prove the theory is a lie, and I will be posting on the subject shortly. 

I have posted before on the subject, but it is important to note that CO2 comprises just 0.04% of the atmosphere, and it is absolutely essential for photosynthesis that makes plant life possible on earth.  Most plants take one molecule of water, combine it with one molecule of Carbon dioxide with energy from sunlight, and make 6 molecules of sugar and 6 molecules of Oxygen.  The sugar is made into sugar fibers like cellulose and hemicelluloses that make up the structure of plant.  (We perceive these sugar fibers as the limbs and trunk of trees.  We grind them up and make paper out of them!)  The oxygen migrates back out of the membrane of the plant and flows into the air making animal life possible.  Thus, plants require Carbon dioxide exhaled from humans and animals to exist; and all animal life including humans require Oxygen exhaled from plants to exist.  Plants thrive on the waste of animal life; people thrive on the waste of plant life.  All life on earth requires this essential exchange.  Now the government has claimed the right to control one of the universal chemical exchanges essential to life on earth.  Just wait until the bureaucrats get their fingers on this one. 

The motives are clear

Hubris alone can explain why a government would declare a small, simple molecule essential for all plant and animal life on earth an “endangerment.”  The declaration has nothing to do with protecting the atmosphere – a molecule essential to our life cannot be considered a danger!  It’s prevalence in the atmosphere is largely unchanged throughout history and as a result, it cannot be a contributor to so-called “global warming.”  There is no correlation between the increase of carbon in the atmosphere through the use of fossil fuels and any warming of earth’s temperatures; and if fact we have been in a cooling period for the past 10 years. 

The hubris is all about a malevolent desire on the part of these elitist utopians to deprive Americans of the freedom to engage in commerce – which relies on energy production; to live private lives in our home keeping it cool and warm; to live where we want to live; to operate automobiles.  It will control where businesses are permitted to operate; the price of food produced shipped, cooled, and cooked with the use of energy.  It is the beginning of the end of private enterprise because permission to operate all aspects of business – and as a consequence, private life – will be controlled by federal bureaucrats bringing about Marx’s goal of nationalizing the means of production.

By focusing on the feeling, the promise; we are rendered incapable of thinking rationally about the thing itself.  Seduction of every kind consists of redirecting our thoughts from analyzing the cost-benefit ratio of a given action to the benefit only.  The mind dwells on that unexperienced, ordinarily forbidden, elusive, utopian, unattainable, unsustainable state of being.  The tempter never encourages you to think about venereal diseases when tempting you with illicit sex; he encourages you to block out images of the loss of innocence; the betrayal of the wife, husband and children; the opprobrium of the community which holds you in high esteem. 

Temptation in commercial life 

I will not suggest that people who want to tempt us are the devil in disguise, but I do want to point out that the process of political and economic seduction is the same.  It understands human nature, and exploits it. This same process is applied in every aspect of human life.  Retail stores are designed to display, and arrange in such a way to overcome your reticence to purchase something you want.  In grocery stores, the items most frequently purchased are placed in the back of the store so you have to walk by other items in order to be tempted to purchase them; their labels screaming about their benefits.  In automobile showrooms the lighting is critical in order to highlight the colors and curves of the cars; their very design is calculated to make you want to purchase them even if you don’t need a new car.  You desire something, and that desire overcomes your reticence.  It’s all by design. 

When autocrats, military generals, monarchs, and warlords controlled every aspect of the lives of their subjects, they didn’t have to concern themselves with deceit – they just used raw power.  Individuals weren’t important enough to consider at all.  Following the rise and spread of Christianity with its central doctrine of the infinite value of the individual requiring the death of God’s Only Begotten Son to effect redemption, democracy had the chance to rise.  Prior to the invention of the individual of the individual, rule by the people – democracy – could not be conceived.  In democracies, leaders can no longer rely on brute force.  Subtlety, deceit, propaganda, and proficiency in the art of lying have become the tools for leaders who envision a culture different than the one envisioned by their citizens. 

Political and economic temptations 

In democratic countries over the last 200 years those who wish to “organize” humanity; to create efficiencies in how citizens live their lives; to coercively force the implementation of their vision of “the good life” denying the citizens the opportunity to determine for themselves what constitutes the good life must engage in seduction, deceit, and  temptation; not raw power.  The power is still the goal of such people, but they just cannot be seen as seeking to take it away from the citizens, so a different narrative must be created.  This is the means by which freedoms are lost; and we are losing them at an incredibly accelerated rate. 

Benefits vs. costs 

The power can be transferred from the people to the elite so long as the focus is on the benefit – the promise, the utopian end, the previously unattainable, the seductive; not the actual cost of attaining it.  This sleight of hand becomes the narrative.  Coercive utopians have a seemingly endless supply of diversionary seductions, lies, and temptations to fool the citizens into approving the unattainable promise without consideration of the cost.  “Universal health care,” “more equitable distribution of wealth,” “saving the planet,” and other nostrums come immediately to mind. 

“Universal health care” 

Throughout history citizens survived without universal health care.  People used to know that eating correctly and in moderation was more healthful, but when they needed the services of the medical community, they saw a physician and paid for the service of the prescription or herb.  The idea that every citizen (and non-citizen) must have access to professional medical oversight whether they can afford to pay for it or not, is nothing more than a utopian dream.  It is the seduction.  Scant attention is paid to the cost. 

The price is that healthy people who deny themselves the pleasures of smoking, drugs, alcohol, risky sex, and irresponsible behaviors of all sorts must pay for the excesses of people who do not deny themselves these things.  If the desire is to create a situation where a few of the powerful in the culture control the behaviors of all the citizens, the focus cannot be on the actual cost of universal health care – it must be focused instead on the benefit. So we hear arguments that we are already paying for it because people go to the emergency room where treatments are government mandated; arguments accusing us of a lack of morality if we would keep the money we earned rather than seeking to have faceless bureaucrats give it away to others; arguments that this program will save us all money, and the like.  

There is never any assessment of the arguments that are made in favor of such a scheme; there is no accountability for the utopians who make these arguments.  It would be an easy thing, and would save $billions if the government simply rescinded the requirement that hospital emergency rooms treat anyone regardless of their ability to pay.  Hospitals may choose to continue some aspect of such a program voluntarily because they think it is in their best public interest not to be seen rejecting injured and very ill patients.  It could also be in the public interest if physicians who performed such services for free could deduct 200% of the actual cost helping them save high taxes on other, paid services.  This could help the physician to end up with lowered gross income, but increased net income without laundering his money through the federal government.  But such analysis is never considered by those who want to organize humanity to complete their personal vision of how we ought to live; control is the goal - not universal health care. 

“Saving the earth” 

The same arguments can be made about “saving the earth.”  Remember that in previous incarnations, this argument was built around the idea of a “coming ice age.”  When that proved not to be seductive enough, the argument was changed to “global warming” and the calamities that could be avoided if only we would give the utopians the power they seek.  Lately – since we have been in a cooling period for 10 years – the argument has been “climate change,” or the presumptuous “saving the earth.”  

Again, no analysis will be made of the truth of the claims or the possibility of achieving the promise; nor will there be any analysis of the cost to produce the utopian end.  To the degree “analysis” of the cost is announced, it will – as usual – be a lie. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, and the past performance of those who want to organize humanity making it fit their vision of what constitutes the good indicates that lying about the cost and the benefit will be widespread. 

Since there is always “global cooling” and “global warming” occurring (the earth is never static) they have found a way to create a constant panic and are now referring to the problem as “climate change” and the answer is “saving the earth.”  The use of this phrase permits them to cry wolf at all times rather than only periodically. 

Distribution of economic goods is a perennial issue.  Thomas Sowell has written extensively on the subject for many years, and points out that we are all troubled by the differences between the extremely rich and the truly poor.  The difficulty with solving the problem, however, can create other problems.  

“Economic justice”

There is the socialist/communist method of dealing with economic disparity. Three central arguments of Karl Marx were that to equalize the economic benefits of a culture nationalization of the means of production so no one could benefit more than anyone else must be done; abolishment of private property must occur so no one could accumulate more than anyone else; and a graduated income tax must be implemented to punish those who managed to accumulate more than others, with the money to be redistributed to those who have less.  All socialist/communist schemes are based on envy; divide the citizens, and deny the opportunity for true charity and generosity. 

A quick glance at the results of this scheme for redistribution, leveling, and organizing people into a utopian mold should chill anyone’s ardor for it.  The seduction is in the promise of a state of being that is unattainable: equal distribution encourages sloth and requires theft.  It requires knowledge about the conditions of individuals that no one can possibly know.  It treats all as equally deserving because as members of the race they merit the reward.  It ignores manners, diligence, determination, sloth, laziness, bigotry, and criminality.  All deserve because they are humans.  The extreme result is seen in the administrations of Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro, Mao Zedong, and others resulting in 100 million deaths of citizens not in times of war in order to “spread the money around.”  Some think that’s a good thing.  Walter Duranty, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist for the New York Times excused Stalin’s murder of 13 million Kulaks after covering it up for years by saying, “If you’re going to make an omelet, you have to crack a few eggs.”

The more moderate result is seen in the high unemployment, lack of creativity, declining vigor, lowered birth rates, and inflation of the European socialist states like England, France, and others with the result that radical Islam is rising to conquer these states without ever firing a shot.  So we are left with the option of rewarding people for their productivity resulting in unequal distribution of wealth.  

By focusing on the utopian promise we fail to consider the cost of attaining it.  Calculating the cost is considered negative, defeatist; the “party of ‘no.’” Tumult, death, and squalor are created by promises of improvement unaccompanied by rational consideration of the cost.  Billions of dollars are spent attempting to create the perfect argument that will seduce a sufficient number of citizens to engage in the forbidden activity before they realize what diseases it spawns.  Worldwide disasters, calamities of all sort, economic collapse, immediacy, moral sentiment guilt trips; all accompanied by generous lying are being used to convince people to support things that are not in their own or anyone else’s interest. 

“Social justice”

We constantly hear the phrase “social justice;” “I’ve given my life to social justice for everyone!”  People applaud, and have no idea what the speaker is talking about.  “Social justice” means absolutely nothing to the hearer, but it sounds great.  “Social justice” to the speaker may mean they plan to suspend free speech and collectivize farming in the U.S. – it is an empty term into which the speaker stuffs whatever meaning he chooses.  

This is the means by which deceit is used to bring about change the utopian would never announce publically.  They have to keep their designs completely hidden because the people would never elect them, or approve of their administration if they knew the truth about what the utopian’s plans really are. 

Conclusion 

When you take a moment and think clearly about various proposals and realistically consider the cost; whether the benefit is possible or even desirable; and other ways to achieve a better life for most people, you will see the tempter’s fangs and drool behind the mask of seduction. 

Taking the time to consider what is being proposed is crucial if we are to avoid outcomes that destroy the life we really want.  Rushing to make changes is universally a terrible choice.  It is a technique used by utopians to keep people from having sufficient time to consider what is being proposed.  We hear that the world will end if we don’t do this now; like taking over 17% of the U.S. economy by means of controlling every aspect of healthcare – it has to be done immediately; but it won’t take any effect until 2013!  Why the rush?  You know the answer. 

The so-called “Cap and Trade” scheme to end CO2 emissions for example, has to be done right now.  We are told variously that we have only a few years left to save the earth, or more recently, only months!  First we must consider that there is no correlation between the amount CO2 in the atmosphere and climate change; second we must consider that human activity amounts to only a fraction of the total CO2 in the atmosphere.  

The science is too difficult for us to understand, takes too much time; so we are in the process of being brainwashed into believing a lie.  And if we do, we shall all be damned.  The CO2 levels are only a propaganda tool; global climate change is only a propaganda tool.  The desire is to control everything that is produced and shipped.  This would give the government control over how warm you keep your home, how far you can drive, whether or not you can own a car, the kinds of work available in the U.S. – everything.  Every light bulb, every delivery truck, every TV, every computer – all of it will be regulated and controlled by bureaucrats in the government.  The latest estimates are that this scheme will cost the average household an addition $1800 per year, and the government can raise that amount easily by tightening the regulation on the use of energy.  Between healthcare and energy, the government is poised to nationalize about 25% of the U.S. economy besides what they already control, and through control of the use of energy they will control all commercial enterprise and private enterprise will cease to exist in the U.S.

The tempter comes and suggests that we can stop global annihilation, or misery, or destitution, or inequality if you will only eat of the tree.  The message is seductive, but the fruit is poison.  If you eat it you will surely die.  When thinking about a benefit, first consider it’s cost.