The Issue: The implications of the 2010 election.
A post written shortly after the 2010 election entitled Bloods vs. Crips discussed the possibility of reversing spending and debt trends in this country. The post was not optimistic regarding either happening.
Neither party wants to cede power to the other. Each is akin to a street gang fighting over turf. They want to control their neighborhood which they define as you and your pocketbook. Even the party on the outside looking in believes big and bigger government is necessary. So, together they battle each other for supremacy while pretending concern over government spending.
The result is a kabuki dance that sees government growing out of control. Spending has not been cut since the wind-down of World War II.
After-Post Evaluation: The expectations of real change were not high. The Tea Party made itself heard and continues to “obstruct” in a manner that appears to be consistent with the expressed will of the majority. The establishment of both parties still does not get the message and attempts to marginalize the Tea Party.
Two means were discussed as vehicles that could lead to change:
- A States Rights movement to restrain the Federal Government. The Republican tsunami in State legislatures was an opportunity to create a movement from below in the form of States Rights. Thus far, this movement has not shown itself in any meaningful way.
- The will of the people. The will of the people always prevails, at least eventually. If there is no institutional response to this will, they take matters into their own hands. That is the nature of unpopular government whether it be democratic or dictatorial. That is a last resort. The possibility of such a movement often prompts institutional response to avoid the loss of power.
- Politicians, or at least enough of them, already understand that higher taxes will not fly. That is why we have had deficits for so many years. They want to provide you with benefits (and themselves with votes) while wanting you to believe government is the source of “free” gifts and benefits.
- Subsequent to World War II, tax rates on the wealthiest individuals ranged from 90% to 28%. Between these two extremes, many other levels were tried. No matter what the tax rates were, the government was only able to collect about 18% of GDP. Changing tax rates changes people’s behavior and incentives. No one is more capable of deciding in what form they collect income than the truly wealthy. Government’s attempt to exploit citizens through the tax system is met with changes in individual behavior that thwarts the attempt.
Washington is unwilling to change its ways. Our representatives are not the “best and the brightest.” They are parasites preying on the population who know only one way — more and then more again! Perhaps enough Tea Party representatives will be elected in 2012 to change this dynamic, although I doubt it. Even if there were, Washington corrupts and many would eventually settle in to the looting that prevails today. After all, this country started with might be presumed a government that was 100% Tea Partiers. Look at it today!
Any movement for change must come from outside of Washington. Further, it must produce binding constraints with consequences if the constraints are violated. Our best hope, is from the States taking back their rights at the expense of the Federal government. That might resurrect the Constitution and put teeth in its limitations.
The alternative is a spontaneous reaction from the people. That will eventually occur if other means do not suffice. It can be a very dangerous vehicle in the sense that it becomes easy for a demagogue to assume the role of driver.
Hopefully the States assume the role they were intended to have.
I see your point and agree with you Monty, but I don’t think you are considering a “Post-collapse” government that will emerge. We, the knowledgeable, know what must happen to heal our nation and put it on a sustainable path. Reduce the size of the federal and state governments back to where, as one of the founding fathers, James Madison I think, said that the “average citizen should never have an encounter with the federal government”, and I would add, about the same for the states. I believe that when its all said and done that dissolving the “United States” is the way to go. Lets face it, we have a more rural red state portion of our nation that has still loves and understands our traditions, and we have large practically third world cesspools passing themselves off as our major cities. We know how each votes, so let them go their separate ways.