Monday, July 20, 2009

Voting and Sharing

headline from our local paper:

Neediest areas not first for stimulus money

By April Castro - Associated Press

SABINAL - Under the Obama administration's economic stimulus plan, needy communities were supposed to be a priority when doling out money to rebuild highways and jump-start the economy.
It hasn't worked out that way...

The article then goes on to describe how the neediest areas are the lightly populated rural areas while most of the money being used so far are going for projects in the more densely populated big cities and other urban areas. It seems the State officials spending the money aren't paying attention to the standards set by Federal officials of how the money is supposed to be spent. One has to wonder if the reason for this is that the people on the ground, living in the area in question, have a better idea where the roads need the most fixin' than the folks in D.C.?

Tax-payer money going the "wrong way" is nothing new. During the reign of FDR at the height of the Great Depression the "Relief" money set aside by Congress to go to the poorest people hit hardest by the Depression was actually sent to locations that FDR needed to appease to get more votes at the next presidential election. The South which had the largest population of any portion of the country of those living at or below the poverty level was already securely locked into voting for anyone running on the Democrat ticket so, though it had some of the more famous government projects, it received the least amount of "Relief" monies. Most of the money went to Republican strongholds to persuade the people living there to become beholden upon the Democrat-controlled Federal government and to support their policies and politicians.

I always find it humorous when people become excited about some form of payment coming their way from the government since the money was mostly their's to begin with and they are only receiving a portion of what was stolen from them in the first place. Those who receive more than anything that was specifically taken from them are receiving only that stolen from their neighbors and should shamefully count themselves amongst the thieves. The benevolence of our benevolent government officials is only intended to purchase your votes and your support for the continued growth of their power and prestige.

But since we supposedly live in a "democracy," let us have a real election to settle the matter once and for all. If the proposal carries, then those who voted for it are allowed to murder and pillage those who voted against it. Of course, ballots will not be allowed to be secret so we can know how everyone voted. Not voting will be considered a "Nay" vote so any non-voters can count themselves amongst the pillaged, though the "Nay" will not be counted against the "Yea" votes so that the measure can carry if even just one person votes at all and in the affirmative.

Can you just see the chaos that will erupt with such an election? People whining that they didn't get a chance to vote, especially after they see the results. Certain people not being allowed to vote for one reason or another (probably because they have a lot of what people might be interested in pillaging from them). Constant calls for recounts. Protests and riots. Anarchy reigns...

But in a sense this is what all elections break down to be. Politicians promising you anything, particularly that which must be stolen from your neighbor, in return for your vote for them. This what Jefferson called the "Tyranny of the Mob." Maybe we could all get along a lot better if we lived by the "Inverted Golden Rule":

"Don't do unto others that which you would not want anyone to do unto you."

May you live in prosperity and peace, but most of all may we all live in liberty...

No comments:

Post a Comment