Letter to the Editor: "Letter to YOU"

I received this via email as a "letter to the editor" sort of deal. I liked what she had to say, so I'm posting it. If you would like to write a respectful response then please feel free to email me your letter as well: sophiesperspective [at] gmail [dot] com.

Please take time to read the whole of this post, even though it is a tad lengthy. Thank you!

Letter to YOU

By Stephanie

picturesforyourday.blogspot.com

picturesbystephanie [at] gmail [dot] com

Let me ask you a question you may or may not have ever thought about. What do the income tax system, welfare, and government stimulus packages all have in common?

They are all ways the government takes your money away from you and uses it however it sees fit. Or rather, since the government is in fact made of individuals, they are ways that those officials you elected to represent your interests are taking your money away and using it however they see fit. Apparently, that now includes firing businessmen.

If you hadn’t heard, President Obama recently told the CEO of Chrysler that he had to leave the company, in terms that made it seem like he had an option. Tell me this: If you were pressured by the president of the United States, with the support of Congress, saying he would only bail out your company if you quit, do you really think you would stay and face continued government pressure and public outrage? I ask again, not if you think it would be right or wrong, but would you dare to refuse? And if you did initially, how long would it last?

That’s not all. The US Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Geitner, has demanded that he have personal and individual power over US companies and businesses—and Congress has granted it. This is yet more power concentrated in one person, and that person has the power to shut YOUR business down if he thinks it is not helping the economy—or for no reason at all. Maybe he won’t like your morals. Maybe he won’t like your slogan. It doesn’t matter and you’ll have no say in the situation. How do you feel about that?

What else do the income tax system, welfare, and government stimulus packages all have in common?

They are all parts of a socialist economy. Don’t believe me? Check out this economic plan proposed by the Socialist Party USA. You’ll find the income tax advocated under point number 6, welfare under number 12, and government “investment” (aka stimulus packages) under number 13. Much, much more is there for your perusal. Sit back and think, how many of those are already in place in the American economy today? Are we really capitalist anymore—or perhaps we have a mixed economy with capitalist roots that is swiftly heading towards socialism? America has not been a nation with a capitalist economy for a long time, and FDR’s socialist New Deal policies pushed American economics down a steep hill heading toward a cliff. We’re currently picking up more speed.

As you read the list of a few socialist goals for America, remember that no matter how good some of those goals sound, the money has to come from somewhere. And you can bet (figuratively speaking of course, since betting is poor financial management and will get you in trouble) that all those millions and billions of dollars needed for employing everyone who wants a job—and supporting those who prefer to be unemployed—will not come from the pockets of the Party leaders. No, they don’t have that kind of money. They are poor socialists who give all their extra money away to those poorer than them, at least if they follow their own theory. Their solution is to force YOU to give up your money to finance these endeavors.

What’s the point of me talking so much about socialism? Didn’t I start off talking about President Obama’s economic plan and actions he’s taking to intervene in the economy? Yes, I did. They are connected. Joined. Inseparable. By the way, I know you understand what I’m saying perfectly. Our president is a socialist. He can deny it all he wants, but he can also deny being black. It doesn’t change the facts. If you can’t tell just by his policies, here's an article that might help convince you. It summarizes many references, including socialist websites, providing evidence to that effect.

Here’s another article for your rumination. It counters socialist economics at some basic levels and shows that our current economic woes are not coming from capitalism as President Obama and other pro-socialist leaders would have you believe. Despite all the central planning (remember that term; you’ll see it again) that our government is doing, the economy is still going downhill—or perhaps because of it. Did you know that many of the interventions have mirrored FDR’s New Deal policies? Oh, those wonderful policies that saved this country from the Depression. Wouldn’t it be nice if we listened to tried-and-true economists who shout warnings that the New Deal actually prolonged the Depression?

Let’s look at a couple of other countries that had the income tax system, welfare, and government stimulus packages, and what happened when their leaders used those facets of the economy to take control of the nation. As you’ll see, both of these sound remarkably like our economy—excessive control of businesses through the Secretary of the Treasury position, excessive regulation, “stimulus” stipulations, government interference in income and government interference in the country’s standard of living (i.e. welfare). We’re heading the same direction as those countries if something doesn’t turn around in the way we think about several key things, economics being one of them.

Then first leader is famous—infamous in fact. He got his start taking control of the economy-- know who he was? Here’s a hint from that article you should still be ruminating on:

In other words, [socialists say] the real solution is central planning; the very thing that turned middle and Eastern Europe into a vast slagheap and gave birth to the Gulag. (Central planning and totalitarianism are both sides of the same coin).

Yep, Stalin.

Now guess who this refers to:

[They had] an all-around system of central planning. In [their] economy there was no question of private initiative and free enterprise. All production activities were directed by the [Minister of Economics—similar to the Secretary of the Treasury]. No enterprise was free to deviate in the conduct of its operations from the orders issued by the government. Price control was only a device in the complex of innumerable decrees and orders regulating the minutest details of every business activity and precisely fixing every individual's tasks on the one hand and his income and standard of living on the other.

Yep, Nazis. Hitler.

Thanks, Mr. President.

___________