Lawyers make a lot of Money without Contributing anything Tangible to Society
An attorney was sitting in his office late one night when Satan appeared before him. Satan said, “I have a proposition for you. You can win every case you try for the rest of your life. Your clients will adore you, your colleagues will stand in awe of you and you will make embarrassing sums of money. All I want in exchange is your soul, your wife’s soul, your children’s souls, the souls of your parents, grandparents, parents-in-law, the souls of all your friends and law partners.” The lawyer thought about this for a moment then asked, “So, what’s the catch?”
That’s funny, isn’t it? Lawyers. Ambulance chasers. The butt of so many jokes. Why? Well, some will say they deserve it. Because they do chase ambulances. And will pass out their business cards if they’re on a sinking ship. Because sinking ships are good for lawsuits. And lawyers love to sue. For they can make a lot of money without contributing anything tangible to society. All they do is get between two parties when large sums of money change hands. And put a portion of that money into their pockets. That’s how they earn their living. Taking money away from others. They’re parasites. Just to get rich. And the big tort lawyers (those who sue people and businesses) get really rich. Allowing them to live very privileged lives.
Take a class action lawsuit. Where they bring a lot of wronged people together to sue a large corporation. The old David and Goliath thing. A little person can never take on a big corporation. But a whole class of them can. When represented by a tort lawyer. Who liken themselves as heroes of the little guy. Taking the big corporation on to make them pay for all the horrible things they’ve done to their clients. But who do they really help? Let’s say they win a judgment from a big corporation of $250,000,000. That’s a lot of money. From that sum they take their cut. Let’s say 50%. Leaving $125 million for the people the corporation wronged. That’s a lot of money. So the people won, too, right? Not really. For there are a lot of people represented in these class actions. Let’s say 5 million in our example. So if you divide the $125 million by 5 million that comes to $25 per person. So, again, who did the lawyers really help? The lawyers. Which is why there are so many lawyer jokes.
In the Private Sector if you want to spend Half of your Life Retired you have to Pay for It
Lawyers vote Democrat. Because they like being privileged people. They don’t want the laws changing that allow them to get so rich when money exchanges hands. Which is why they donate heavily to the Democrat Party. And don’t donate to the Republicans. Who complain about the high costs of frivolous lawsuits to businesses in an overly litigious society. It’s so bad that a footnote in the financial statements of a corporation about a lawsuit is not that big of a deal. Why? Because so many corporations are sued that investors are more surprised to see one that isn’t being sued. This is why Republicans want tort reform. And pass ‘loser-pays’ into law. Like many other countries have. Where the loser in court pays for the attorney fees for the side that wins. Which would greatly cut down on frivolous lawsuits. And cut the costs businesses incur from these frivolous lawsuits that they pass on to their customers. So the lawyers donate to Democrats. To prevent any tort reform that would change the easy way lawyers have of getting rich.
It’s the world’s oldest profession. Screwing people for money. But lawyers aren’t the only ones seeking privilege. There are a lot of others, too. Interestingly, they, too, support the Democrat Party. Such as the United Autoworkers. They donate heavily to the Democrat Party to keep labor laws favorable to unions. To make it more difficult for their nonunion competition. And to use the power of government to force people to pay may for a union-made car. Allowing their union members to live better lives than those outside of the UAW. And when even that doesn’t allow General Motors to pay its bills when selling a record number of cars the UAW goes to government for a bailout of their woefully underfunded pension fund. So their union members can continue to have a more generous retirement at an earlier age than those outside of the UAW.
Teacher unions seek privilege, too. You hear a lot about how the teachers don’t earn that much. But then again, they don’t work that much. Getting 3 months off in the summer. So you can’t compare their wages to people who don’t get the 3 summer months off. But for teachers it’s not so much about the paycheck. It’s the benefits. Very generous health insurance coverage. And pensions. Which have gone the way of the dodo in the private sector. Because people are just living too long into retirement. When they first set up these pensions people were dying in their sixties. The actuaries never saw people living into their eighties as common. So in the private sector if you want to spend half of your life retired you have to pay for it. And you work as long as necessary to fund the retirement you want. The union pensions just can’t work these days as they once did. Which is why teacher unions like the United Autoworkers and lawyers support the Democrat Party. They want to keep their privileged lives.
The Wealth Transfers of the Welfare State give Democrats Money and Privilege
Of course privilege is nothing new to the Democrat Party. They have long stood for privilege. Even now. As the Democrats provide themselves all kinds of exceptions from the Affordable Care Act. For more expensive and lower quality health insurance is good for the masses. But not for the privileged elite. Or their special friends who support them so generously with campaign donations. Congress has had a history of exempting themselves from the laws they pass for us. It took the Republican winning of the House in the 1994 midterm elections to change that. The first Republican-controlled House since 1952 required Congress to be held to the same laws as the rest of us. A bitter pill for Democrats to swallow. For their feelings of privilege go way back.
The Democrat Party can trace its pedigree back to Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican Party. The party of the slave-owning planter elite. Who from day one fought for their privilege starting with the Three-Fifths Compromise. To give them a greater say in the new national government than their voting population allowed. The planter elite’s South turned into an Old World aristocracy. With great manors for the landed aristocracy. And vast lands worked by slaves. Very similar to feudalism in the Old World. And something they fought hard to keep. Their privilege. The Southern Democrats used the power of the national government (such as the Fugitive Slave Act) to interfere with state laws in the North. To protect their feudalism by keeping slavery legal as long as they could while the north was industrializing and modernizing. With paid laborers. When they lost control of the House due to the growing population in the North they turned to war. Saying that the national government was interfering with state laws in the South. And getting poor southern farmers who owned no slaves to fight and die so the southern aristocracy could live on.
When the Southern Democrats lost the American Civil War they scrambled to maintain their privilege. They unleashed a terror on the freed slaves and Republicans with the KKK. The Democrats then wrote Jim Crowe Laws. Separate but equal. Government-enforced racial segregation. During debate of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Democrat and former Exalted Cyclops of the KKK Robert Byrd filibustered for 14 hours. To keep the South segregated. With power and privilege in a new aristocracy. Centered not on land but political power and cronyism. Even becoming the party for blacks as ironic as that is. Trading government programs for votes. And destroying the black family in the process. Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) replaced black fathers with government. And moved single mothers and their children into housing projects that became infested with drugs and crime. But this large (and failed) welfare state transferred a lot of wealth to the Democrats. Giving them money and privilege. That they can use to maintain their power. By taking care of those who take care of them. Lawyers, the UAW, teacher unions and other privilege seekers. For nothing has changed on the left. They have been and always will be an aristocratic-thinking, privilege-seeking people who want to live better than the rest of us. While we pay for their privileged lives.
Tags: aristocracy, aristocratic-thinking, attorney, class action lawsuit, Democrat, Democrat Party, far Left, feudalism, frivolous lawsuits, health insurance, lawsuits, lawyer, money, North, Old World, pension, planter elite, privilege, privilege seekers, privilege seeking, privileged elite, privileged lives, Republican, retirement, slaves, South, Southern Democrats, teacher unions, teachers, tort, tort lawyer, tort reform, UAW, union, unions, United Autoworkers, wealth, welfare state
Slavery made the South more like an Old World Aristocracy than a New World Meritocracy
Democrats don’t like people of color. Never have. The Democrat Party’s lineage goes back to Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican Party. Thomas Jefferson was one of our Founding Fathers who, as the Democrats love to remind us, owned slaves. In fact, the Democratic-Republican Party was the party of the planter elite. And of slavery. While the opposition party, the Federalists, whose members included George Washington, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, preferred manufacturing and commerce for the future of the United States. Not just plantations and slavery.
It was these southern planters who made the Three-Fifths Compromise necessary. Slaves couldn’t vote. So the North didn’t want to count them in determining the number of representatives a state had in the House of Representatives. The planter elite did not like this. As the anti-slave North had more free people and would end up controlling the government. Possibly passing anti-slave legislation. Well, without the southern states there would be no United States. So they compromised and counted some of their slaves. Giving the planter elite greater power in the new federal government than their population would otherwise have allowed. And to seal the deal they agreed not to discuss the issue of slavery again for 20 years.
The minority power in the South, the planter elite, who were Democratic-Republicans, brought a lot of slaves to the United States during that 20 year moratorium on the slavery issue. Swelling the slave population in the South. But once the 20 years were up Congress banned the slave trade. So from that point forward all slaves would have to be born on U.S. soil. But the minority power in the South had built their little fiefdoms by then. Owning large estates. With their lands worked by their large slaveholdings. Making the South more like an Old World aristocracy than a New World meritocracy. And the planter elite liked having so much power vested in so few of their hands. From having their few numbers control the federal government. To their absolute control of so many human lives on their plantations. They were an elite few. A superior people. And they liked it.
The South used the Power of the Federal Government to Suppress States’ Rights in the North with the Fugitive Slave Act
Over time as the north pursued the dreams of Washington, Adams and Hamilton immigration began to swell the population in the industrial North. Leading to the South losing their control over the House of Representatives. And threatening their elitism. By then the Democratic-Republican Party had become the Democrat Party. Which pushed to protect the institution of slavery. To protect their southern aristocracy. And their elevated status as a superior people. They used the power of the federal government where they could. Such as passing the Fugitive Slave Act to force free states against their will to return free blacks in their states to slavery. Then they argued that their states’ rights were at risk with all of the North’s abolition talk. Where the North might one day do what the South did to them. Use the federal government to force a state to do something against their will. Such as they did with the Fugitive Slave Act.
Their fight for the Senate led to further compromises to keep the union together while accommodating the planter elite. The Missouri Compromise (1820) had prohibited slavery in the new territory in the Louisiana Territory above approximately the southern border of Missouri (but permitted it within the borders of Missouri). Each state gets two senators. So with the House lost the Democrats needed more of the new states from the Louisiana Territory entered into the Union as slave states. Even those above the southern border of Missouri. Which they did with the Kansas–Nebraska Act. Which repealed the Missouri Compromise and replaced it with popular sovereignty. Where the people would chose whether they wanted to be a slave state or a free state. Setting off a mad rush by both sides to get to these territories so they could vote the slave status of these new states their way. Leading to a bloody civil war in Kansas.
Then another blow fell to the southern aristocracy. Abraham Lincoln. With the election of Republican Abraham Lincoln the southern aristocracy lost not only the House of Representatives but the presidency as well. Worse, the Republicans were an anti-slavery party. So even if they were somehow able to hold onto the Senate the Republicans in power would challenge the planter elite’s supremacy. Break up their fiefdoms. And challenge their power. Something this elite few were willing to fight to prevent. Well, they were willing to have others fight for them. To maintain the social order in the South. Leading to cries about states’ rights. And an over-powerful federal government. Despite their having used the power of the federal government to suppress states’ rights in the North with the Fugitive Slave Act.
Democrats see Benefits for Blacks as a Necessary Evil to keep them in Power
Most southerners were poor farmers. Who owned no slaves. Yet they rose to fight for states’ rights. And to protect the South from northern aggression. At least, that was what the planter elite had them believe. Who sent many of these poor farmers to their deaths in the American Civil War. When it was over approximately 8.6% of the South’s population was dead. By comparison World War II killed approximately 405,399 Americans. However, if we had suffered the same death rate as the South did in the American Civil War our World War II dead would have totaled over 12 million. This is what the southern aristocracy was willing to—and did—sacrifice to maintain their power and privilege. Their supremacy over other people. Especially over their black slaves.
Such a feeling of superiority allows you to do some pretty horrible things. Just review the history of Nazi Germany to see some of the atrocities a ‘master race’ can do. In the post-war South the Democrats did not lose with grace. They resented the martial law in the South after the war. And they hated Republican rule. Protecting their former slaves. Even allowing them to run for government office. It was all too much for the fallen southern aristocracy. To remind people of the proper order of southern society they formed the KKK. And unleashed a terror across the South. Killing their former slaves. And Republicans. To codify their white supremacy the Democrats turned to the legislature. And passed laws to segregate the ‘inferior blacks’ from their superior selves. Jim Crowe Laws. Separate but equal. With the emphasis on ‘separate’. In time pressure grew against the southern Democrats. But they held strong in Congress. Fighting against any civil rights legislation. Including the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Where Democrat Senator Robert Byrd (and former Exalted Cyclops of the KKK) filibustered against the Civil Rights Act for 14 hours and 13 minutes. To keep the blacks segregated from their superior selves.
Things are a lot better these days. But Democrat feelings of superiority die hard. Even though they would have us believe they like blacks today. Despite their past hatred of blacks. And their seething anger of having lost them from their plantations. But they found a way to ‘get them back on the plantation’. By making them dependent on government. In exchange for their vote. Which keeps them in power. Back where they believe they belong. And are entitled to be. Because they are a superior people. So benefits for blacks are a necessary evil to Democrats. For they still don’t like them. As evidenced by where they live. Where some of the richest Democrats (such as Nancy Pelosi) live in the whitest of neighborhoods. And their apparent racial purification of society. Through the guise of women’s rights. The most important thing to women, according to Democrats, is abortion. And they do their best to make abortion readily available. Especially to women of color. Like in New York City. And Mississippi. Where black women are having far more abortions than white women. Making America whiter. More like the neighborhood where Nancy Pelosi lives. And more like the color Democrats have fought to keep America since the Three-Fifths Compromise. The Fugitive Slave Act. Popular Sovereignty. The KKK. And Jim Crowe Laws.
Tags: abolition, abortion, Abraham Lincoln, American Civil War, aristocracy, blacks, civil rights, Democrat Party, Democratic-Republican Party, Democrats, elite, elite few, federal government, fiefdoms, Fugitive Slave Act, House of Representatives, Jim Crowe laws, Kansas, Kansas-Nebraska Act, KKK, Louisiana Territory, Missouri, Missouri Compromise, Nancy Pelosi, New World, North, Old World, plantation, planter elite, popular sovereignty, power, privilege, Republican, Senate, slavery, slaves, South, southern aristocracy, Southern Democrats, states' rights, superior, superiority, supremacy, Three-Fifths Compromise, white supremacy
Week in Review
Between combat and disease the American Civil War claimed some 620,000 lives. The bloodiest war in U.S. history. Killing more than all the wars from the Revolutionary War through the Vietnam War. The North lost about 360,000. While the South lost about 260,000. So the North suffered about 100,000 more dead than the South. However, the population of the South at the end of the war was approximately 3,000,000. While the north had about 29,000,000. So as a percentage of their population the North lost about 1.3% of her population. While the South lost about 8.6% of her population. Which is why some in the South want to honor their war dead (see Group puts Confederate flag on Ga. specialty tag by AP posted 2/19/2014 on Yahoo! News).
Georgia officials have once again approved a specialty license plate featuring the Confederate battle flag, infuriating civil rights advocates and renewing a debate among those who believe the symbol honors Confederate heritage and those who see it as racially charged.
Southerners call the American Civil War the War of Northern Aggression. In which they fought for states’ rights. After their control of the federal government faded thanks to the population growth in the north. They lost control of the House. And the only way to keep control of the Senate was by admitting new states into the union as slave states. Finally, the Fugitive Slave Law was the last straw for some in the north. Requiring them to capture and return runaway slaves even though those slaves were legally free in those northern states. So a large federal government was good when it helped southern slave owners. And states’ rights were bad when it didn’t help southern slave owners.
The rich southern planters controlled the government in the South. They had the wealth. And the slaves. Their lives were like the lives shown on the plantations in the movie Gone with the Wind. A landed aristocracy. Just like it was in feudal Europe. Only with slaves instead of peasants. Wealth and power were concentrated in few hands. Creating great wealth inequality. Most southerners were dirt poor and worked on family farms and were too poor to even own a slave. But it was these people the rich planters used to fight a war for them to preserve their landed aristocracy. Not the American dream the Founding Fathers envisioned. Or the dream these dirt-poor southern farmers were trying to live. The freedom to be left alone to work their own land. Which is, of course, why they went to war. Someone was invading their land.
No government is going to allow a Nazi swastika on a license plate to commemorate the SS. Because the SS did some bad things. Some would even say they were evil. The Confederate soldiers, though, were not evil. They were Americans. Who were lied to by the planter elite. So they could maintain their Old World aristocracy. These men fought bravely in battle. And suffered horrible casualties. Even Abraham Lincoln held no ill will towards these men. When a general asked Lincoln how the defeated Confederates should be treated he said, “Let ’em up easy.” All they had to do was sign paroles saying they would no longer fight and they could go home and resume their lives. There were to be no retributions. For once the war was over they were fellow countrymen again.
So putting a Confederate battle flag on a license plate is less of a sign of racism and more of a remembrance for those who fought in the battlefields of the Civil War. Especially for the 8.6% of the population who perished. Leaving behind widows. And orphans. So many that it was hardly possible for someone in the South not to have lost someone in that war.
Tags: American Civil War, aristocracy, Civil War, Confederate, Confederate battle flag, Georgia, landed aristocracy, Lincoln, North, planter elite, planters, rich planters, slave owners, slaves, South, Southern planters, states' rights
The Europeans built Larger Ships and used Advanced Navigational Skills to sail from Europe to the Far East
The Anatolian peninsula (roughly the area of modern day Turkey) has long been a trade crossroads. It’s where the Black Sea (and the rivers into Europe and Russia) met the Mediterranean Sea. It’s where Europe met Asia. Where East met West. All important long-distant trade traveled through the Anatolian peninsula. Right through the Bosporus. The straits between East and West.
The Greeks, the Persians, the Romans and the Ottoman Turks all coveted this region. When the Western Roman Empire fell the great Italian city-states rose. They dominated the Mediterranean. And the trade through the Bosporus. Where the Silk Road for centuries brought riches from the Far East into Europe. The Italian merchant banks controlled that trade. Until the Eastern Roman Empire (the Byzantine Empire) fell to the Ottoman Turks. Which, lucky for the Europeans, happened at the time of the Renaissance. Bringing an end to the Middle Ages. And ushering in the modern era.
It started in Italy. And then spread into Europe. A rebirth (hence Renaissance) of all that Greek learning. Which shifted the trading center from the eastern Mediterranean to Europe. Where the Europeans built larger ships and used advanced navigational skills to sail from Europe to the Far East. Bypassing the Silk Road. And the Ottoman Turks in the Anatolian peninsula. Making the Europeans the new rich traders. Knowledge and wealth created more ships for trade. And advanced armies and navies. Making the Europeans the masters of the world.
Peter the Great pulled Russia out of the Middle Ages by making it more European
While the Mediterranean and European nations were ushering in the modern world not all of Asia followed them. Russia in particular remained in the Middle Ages. A vast land full of disparate peoples. Not a unique and singular Russian people. Until Ivan the Terrible came along. The Grand Prince of Moscow from 1533 to 1547. Then Tsar of All the Russians. Ivan the Terrible united Russia by conquering it. But at a cost. Continuous wars killed a lot of Russian people. Which left a lot of farmland fallow. Giving Russia a chronic problem they would have for centuries. The struggle to feed themselves.
Tsar Peter the Great (1682 – 1725) modernized Russia. To be a more modern country like those in Europe. He even went to Europe incognito to learn as much as he could about advanced European ways. And had Europeans help him pull Russia out of the Middle Ages. He made his army to be like European armies. Learned about shipbuilding. And built a Russian navy. Which was a problem as the only access to the sea Russia had was the Arctic Ocean via the White Sea. Which meant, of course, war and conquest. He fought the Swedes for access to the Baltic Sea. And he fought the Ottoman Turks for access to the Black Sea.
The disparate people of Russia were not all that happy with his ideas or the money he spent. So he brutally suppressed any discontent. Peter built his navy. And a new capital on the Baltic Sea. Saint Petersburg. A European cultural center. And the Imperial capital of Russia. He also attacked the Ottoman Empire. And lost. Losing his Black Sea ports. But Russia would return to fight the Ottoman Turks. Under Catherine the Great.
The Bolsheviks killed Tsar Nicholas and his Family and ushered in the Oppressive Soviet Union
Catherine the Great ruled during Russia’s Golden Age. Continuing the work started by Peter the Great to modernize Russia. Making Russia a great European power. Through military conquest. And diplomacy. She was even an international mediator. And established the League of Armed Neutrality to protect neutral shipping from British attacks during the American Revolutionary War.
Catherine pushed Russia’s borders out largely at the expense of the Ottoman Empire. And the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. These conquests cost, though. And she turned to the nobility to pay for them. In return she supported the nobility. But the wealth she got form the nobility came from the serfs (basically slave laborers) working their land. Which took a lot of work to pay for her conquests. Leading to a peasant uprising or two. But serfdom would continue in Russia. Tsar Alexander I advanced the status of Russia with his defeat of Napoleon. They even called him the Savior of Europe. But serfdom remained as the Industrial Revolution took off in Europe. Halting the modernization of Russia.
Tsar Alexander II emancipated the serfs in 1861. Ending the landed aristocracy’s monopoly of power. Serfs left their lands. And moved into the cities. Selling their labor. Industrializing Russia. Still, their freedom favored the landed aristocracy. Who were compensated for their serfs’ freedom with a tax paid by the freed serfs. Which little improved the life of the freed serfs. And did little to ease the revolutionary fervor long simmering in the Russian people. Especially those outside the nobility.
When Tsar Nicholas II entered Russia into World War I things did not go well for Russia. Military losses, food shortages, fuel shortages, inflation and striking factory workers made the nation ripe for revolution. Tsar Nicholas went off to command the Russian Army personally. Leaving his wife Alexandra to run the country in his absence. Who turned to Grigori Rasputin for help. Which didn’t help quell the revolutionary fervor simmering in the Russian people. They didn’t like Rasputin. Or the Tsar. And made Tsar Nicholas the last emperor of the Russian Empire. Which the Bolsheviks made permanent. By killing Nicholas and his entire family. Which ultimately ushered in the Soviet Union. One of the most oppressive regimes of all time.
Tags: Anatolian peninsula, aristocracy, Asia, Black Sea, Bolsheviks, Bosporus, Catherine the Great, East, Europe, Europeans, Far East, Greek, Italy, Ivan the Terrible, Mediterranean, Middle Ages, modern era, nobility, Ottoman, Ottoman Empire, Ottoman Turks, Peter the Great, Rasputin, Renaissance, revolution, revolutionary fervor, Roman Empire, Russia, Russian Empire, serfdom, serfs, Silk Road, Soviet Union, trade, Tsar, Tsar Alexander, Tsar Nicholas, Turks, West
Stores used the Incentives of Black Friday to get People to do what they Wanted
A belated happy Thanksgiving. And a belated happy Black Friday. We say belated because Black Friday was already here by the time Friday woke from its sleepy slumber. No more waiting in line Friday morning for those stores to open. No. Today if you snooze (i.e., spend Thanksgiving with the family at home) you lose. Because it’s first come first served. Which means if you wanted to get some of those deep discounts before they run out you didn’t let anything silly like celebrating Thanksgiving with the family get in your way.
Now everyone loves a bargain. It’s why we scan the Sunday sales papers. And search online for the best price. But in the Obama ‘recovery’ there isn’t a whole lot of spending going on. As there isn’t a whole lot of employment going on. Since President Obama assumed office his policies have destroyed some 10 million jobs. And one thing about unemployed people. They definitely want a bargain. Especially if they want a good Christmas for their family during the dark times of the Obama presidency.
But there is a greater lesson Black Friday can tell us other than President Obama is a bad president. Especially in things economic. Why are stores opening on Thanksgiving? Because they’re cruel and evil forcing their workers to slave away during a holiday? No. It’s not that. In fact, some employees love working on a holiday. For they get paid more working on a holiday than they normally would. Allowing them to earn extra money to give their families a good Christmas during the dark times of the Obama presidency. As it turns out shoppers and workers alike like Black Friday. For it allows each to have more for less. And that is the great lesson of Black Friday. Getting people to do what you want by offering them something they want. Or, in other words, offering them an incentive.
The Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 pitted Northern Republicans against Slave-Owning Southern Democrats
Slaves working in the planter South had no desire to be slaves. Yet they were slaves. Why? There weren’t slaves in the North. Only in the South. The blacks in the north chose not to be slaves. While those in the South had no choice. The planter elite in the South, the ‘Old World’ planter aristocracy, used force. And having a larger force in Washington than they normally would have (thanks to the Three-Fifths Compromise that counted slaves as three-fifths of a person for representation in Congress) they were able to use the force of government to continue to force blacks into slavery. The Southern Democrats (i.e., the ‘Old World’ planter aristocracy) were able to keep the black man enslaved until the mid 19th century. Even using the power of the federal government to override states’ rights in the North. Using the Fugitive Slave Act to force northern states to return fugitive slaves to their Southern Democrat owners. The ‘Old World’ planter aristocracy.
This is coercion. This is how you get people to do what they don’t want to do. Using the power of the federal government the Southern Democrats kept their slaves in bondage. Also, using the power of the federal government they forced those in the North who wanted to help ‘fugitive’ slaves to stay free return their slaves or else. That ‘or else’ being the full weight of the federal government coming down on them with extreme prejudice. But when the North became more populated control of the House of Representatives favored the larger populated North. Despite the Three-Fifths Compromise. Which left the Senate. And as each state got two senators how the new states entered the union mattered. For the planter elite to hold their power over the United States.
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was an early attempt to put slavery onto the path of oblivion. Those in the North did not want it. The planter elite in the South did. So they compromised. Slavery could remain in the South to appease the planter elite but the compromise prohibited slavery in the new Louisiana Territory that Thomas Jefferson purchased above the 36°30′ parallel (about the southern border of Missouri). Except in the state of Missouri. Then came the Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 and the idea of popular sovereignty. Throwing the Missouri Compromise of 1820 out the window. These two states were both above the 36°30′ parallel. The Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 said the first people into the fledging states could choose for themselves if they would be a slave-state or a free-state. Which led to a mad rush to Kansas. And a bloody civil war there. That eventually led to the American Civil War. To settle once and for all the issue of slavery in America. Would the Southern Democrats prevail and keep the black man in bondage? Or would the Republicans free the slaves?
Obamacare is less like Black Friday and more like Slavery
Even if you flunked your history class you should know the answer to this. Abraham Lincoln and his Republicans defeated the Southern Democrats and won the American Civil War. Freeing the slaves. Of course, the Southern Democrats were not good losers. They gave us the KKK. Then the Jim Crowe Laws. The separate but equal nonsense that didn’t exist in the Republican North. The old southern aristocracy were not huge fans of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. All they wanted was privilege. They wanted the Old World in the New World. And the planter elite fought bitterly to keep that. Well, not them as much as their fellow southerners they lied to about states’ rights. Getting them (most of who were too poor to own a single slave) to fight and sacrifice their lives to maintain the institution of slavery. To maintain the privilege of the southern aristocracy.
So there you have examples of incentive and coercion. Black Friday incentivized people to hire in for seasonal jobs during the holiday season. And brought people into stores with deep discounting. Everyone got something they wanted. And so they did what the store owners wanted. People worked for them on Thanksgiving. And people came into the stores on Thanksgiving. Both of their own free will. Now contrast that to slavery. Where there was no free will. Only the coercion of the federal government. Where fear and intimidation compelled slaves to remain slaves. And their only incentive was to obey their masters to avoid physical harm.
With the Supreme Court ruling the penalty of Obamacare became a tax. Allowing the federal government to compel people to buy health insurance or suffer the consequences. A ‘tax’ that will grow in time. Buy insurance or else. With that ‘or else’ being the full force and fury of the IRS. Something most people would find more unpleasant than a colonoscopy. Without any anesthetic. No, a letter from the IRS is something no one wants to see in their mail. For few things will fill you with fear and dread more. This is the enforcement mechanism of Obamacare. Which they need because people otherwise wouldn’t spend more for less. Higher insurance premiums to cover things they will never need (a gay man will never need prenatal care). And sky-high deductibles that will be like having no insurance. As everything will be out of pocket until you reach that sky-high deductible. Which few people will reach unless they have a catastrophic illness or accident. This is why people are NOT signing up for Obamacare. Because Obamacare ain’t no Black Friday. Obamacare is offering nothing the people want. At prices higher than they ever had to pay for health insurance before. Leaving them with less to spend on their family. Forcing them to cut out things they once enjoyed. Which is why Obamacare will fail. Because you can’t incentivize people to make their lives worse. No, to do that you need the fearful power of the state. Just like the Southern Democrats used to maintain the institution of slavery.
Tags: American Civil War, aristocracy, bargain, Black Friday, Christmas, Civil War, coercion, dark times of the Obama presidency, deductible, federal government, free will, fugitive slaves, incentive, incentivize, insurance, IRS, Kansas-Nebraska Act, Missouri Compromise, North, Obama, Obamacare, Old World, planter, planter aristocracy, planter elite, Republicans, slavery, slaves, South, Southern Democrats, states' rights, Thanksgiving, Three-Fifths Compromise
Some of the Richest People in the United States live in the Suburbs of Washington, D.C.
Liberals say they care about the people. While they say conservatives only care about their money. Conservatives want to cut taxes and government spending so they can keep more of their money to spend on their families. Liberals want to increase taxes and government spending. To take more money from taxpayers to spend on other people. People who are more deserving of that money than the people who earned it.
Liberals say they want to tax and spend because they care about people. And not money. Like conservatives. Yet the more money a liberal government collects in taxes the more powerful that government grows. And the richer those in government get. Just look at the wealth surrounding Washington, D.C., which includes six of the ten wealthiest counties in the U.S. It used to be the military industrial complex. Now it’s the government industrial complex. For liberals do not like the military. And gut defense spending to fund their welfare state. Spending our money to reward their friends. And buying votes by making people dependent on government.
Some of the richest people in the United States live in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Who got rich on taxpayer money. Where those connected to the liberal aristocracy enjoy obscene levels of wealth. While the median family income falls. Leaving families in the rest of the country to get by on less. While those connected to government enjoy those obscene levels of wealth. Yet liberals care about the people. And not these obscene levels of wealth.
Liberals have grown Very Wealthy by Caring for the People ‘instead’ of Money
So it’s no secret the more money the government collects the better liberals in government live. The bigger government grows the more government jobs that are available. Allowing liberals to spread the wealth. Other people’s wealth, that is. So it’s good for those inside the government aristocracy. Which is why liberals ‘care’ about the people. So they can run a massive welfare state. With them at the top. Like Old World royalty. Passing alms out to the people. Where the people grovel. And are obedient. Grateful for what royalty gives them. Thanking them politely. And never forgetting their place. The dirt beneath their feet (to borrow a line from the musical Les Misérables).
It is hard, then, to believe liberals when they say they care about the people. As caring for the people has made them very wealthy. Wealth they acquired by taking it away from other people. Via taxes. It is harder still to believe them when you look at their actions. Whenever there is a high-profile gun crime, for example, they immediately use it to advance gun control legislation. As if America is suffering from a plague of gun deaths. And that only when the government takes away guns from law-abiding gun owners will the dying stop. Of course, others throughout history have wanted to take away the people’s guns. Including the British in 1775. When the shot heard ’round the world was fired. Kicking off the Revolutionary War.
So Americans are very suspect whenever anyone comes after their guns. Because that means only one thing. Those trying to take away those guns want to make these gun owners weaker. The question is, why? Why do governments want to make their people weaker? Probably for the same reason ruling elites everywhere do. When you’re greatly outnumbered you don’t want the people you’re oppressing to be able to fight back.
For Every Person who ‘picked’ an Obamacare Policy 38 People lost the Insurance they Liked and Wanted to Keep
Listening to liberals you would think that the only way people are dying in America is from gun violence. Is this true? If not exactly how are people dying? Well, according to the Centers for Disease and Prevention (see Table 2. Deaths, death rates, and age-adjusted death rates for 113 selected causes, Injury by firearms, Drug-induced Injury at work, and Enterocolitis due to Clostridium difficile: United States, final 2010 and preliminary 2011) the total deaths in 2011 was 2,512,873. Some of the leading causes of death were cardiovascular diseases at 778,503 (31.0%). Cancers (Malignant neoplasms) at 575,313 (22.9%). Chronic lower respiratory diseases at 143,382 (5.7%). Just with these three groups of diseases we’re at 59.6% of all 2011 deaths. And that’s before we get to non-disease related deaths. Such as Drug-induced deaths at 40,239 (1.6%). Motor vehicle accidents at 34,677 (1.4%). Falls at 26,631 (1.1%). And one of the least causes of deaths. Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms at 11,101 (0.4%).
Gun deaths account for less than one half of one percent of all deaths in 2011. Yet they want to take guns away from law-abiding gun owners to stop an epidemic of gun deaths totaling 0.4% of all deaths in 2011. That’s what liberals are focused on. That. And the decriminalization of drugs. Because drugs are a victimless crime. Something only responsible adults choose to do. Despite drug-induced deaths being more than three and half times greater than gun deaths. But liberals are hard on guns. And soft on drugs. Even though more people die from drugs than from guns. Yet liberals care about people.
The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was to provide affordable health insurance to about 50 million of uninsured people. With the rollout of Obamacare only 106,185 ‘picked’ an insurance policy in October (some may have bought a plan or simply placed one in their shopping cart). While 4.02 million people in 28 states have lost their health insurance (see White House to Allow Insurers to Continue Canceled Health Plans by Carol E. Lee and Louise Radnofsky posted 11/14/2013 on The Wall Street Journal). So for every person who ‘picked’ an insurance policy 38 people lost the insurance they liked and wanted to keep. Considering 59.6% of all deaths in 2011 were from heart disease, cancer and chronic lower respiratory diseases taking away health insurance from 4.02 million people could very well cause more people to die from these diseases. For they are very common diseases. And these policy cancellations are only from the individual market. When the cancellations for the employer-provided plans start hitting next year we may be seeing hundreds of millions who will lose their health insurance. Which is by design. To force the people who already have insurance into costlier plans to pay for those who don’t. And, of course, to make government bigger. As well as making liberals in the government aristocracy wealthier.
Whenever there is a high-profile gun death the left renews their push for new gun control legislation. Even if it saves only one child. They say this despite guns being responsible for less than one half of one percent of all deaths. Yet when they take away health insurance from 4.02 million people who may die from heart disease, cancer and chronic lower respiratory diseases, these deaths are negligible. Acceptable. A small percentage of the population whose deaths won’t mean a thing in the grand scheme of things. All that is important to them is protecting and growing the government aristocracy. So they can continue to live in the wealthiest counties in the U.S. While enjoying their regal lives paid for with other people’s money. Yet it’s the liberals that care about people.
Tags: aristocracy, cancer, chronic lower respiratory diseases, conservatives, drugs, government aristocracy, government spending, gun control, gun control legislation, gun crime, gun deaths, guns, heart disease, law-abiding gun owners, liberals, liberals care about the people, Obamacare, obscene levels of wealth, royalty, taxes, taxpayers, wealth, welfare state
The Way to Great Wealth in the South was King Cotton
At the recent 50th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech most if not all of the speakers were liberal Democrats. As if the Republicans were not welcomed there. Funny. As it was the Republicans who battled the Democrats to end slavery, Jim Crowe Laws and discrimination.
America’s original sin, slavery, was a part of the Old World southern planters did not want to give up. It was very similar to the manorial system of Europe. Where peasants were tied to the land. On a manor. Unable to leave. Land that a rich landowner owned. The lord of the manor. Property and status were hereditary. And the peasants at the bottom of the ladder had neither.
The lords belonged to the aristocracy. The nobility. They lived in glorious mansions. Gave magnificent parties. And enjoyed the best of everything. Courtesy of owning land. The peasants worked the land. And produced the greatest wealth in the kingdom for their lord. Food. In the American South this soon became cotton. King Cotton. The way to great wealth in the South was growing cotton. And the more slaves you had the more noble your life was.
The Founding Fathers wanted to Eradicate Slavery at the Time of the Founding
Things were different in the North. Years of growing tobacco had depleted the land. So they diversified. Grew different crops. And rotated the crops around. This required a more specialized workforce as things changed from year to year. And few farms grew one large cash crop anymore. So they turned to paid-labor. Which was more efficient. So while the South held on to the Old World the North became more egalitarian.
The Founding Fathers knew that a nation based on all men being equal could not include the institution of slavery. They wanted to eradicate it at the time of the drafting of the Constitution. But that created a problem with the South. At the time of the Founding their economy was dependent on slavery. And because it was they had more slaves than the North. So freeing the slaves would not only destroy their economy it would force the South to live in a biracial society that was unheard of at that time. Nowhere in the world were there biracial societies. Not to mention the fact that the freed blacks would outnumber the whites. The very same whites that once brutally oppressed the blacks.
To form a more perfect union they needed the southern states. Which they had to take as-is. With the institution of slavery. It was a bitter pill to swallow. As some of these Founding Fathers, especially the ones that didn’t own slaves, were conscious of the history books that would one day be written. As well as being truly opposed to slavery. But the choice was a new nation with slavery. Or no new nation. And continued sectional disputes. Even hostilities. Making them ripe for European intrigue. Especially from the Old World Empires who wanted to expand their empires into North America.
The Republicans Freed the Slaves, Fought against Jim Crowe Laws and Desegregated the South
So the Founding Fathers tabled the subject of slavery for 20 years. Sure that in 20 years time the South would adopt paid labor as they did in the North. Sadly, a great invention changed all that. The cotton gin. Which could process cotton faster than slaves could pick it. King Cotton promised more wealth than ever before. All you needed was a lot of slaves. Dashing the hopes of the Founding Fathers.
Wealth. Nobility. Life was good for the privileged few in the South. The planter elite. The southern Democrats. Who used the power of the federal government to return fugitive slaves. Then bitched about the federal government after they lost control of it. The planter elite brought the nation to civil war. To preserve the institution of slavery. To keep the Old World in the South. To keep the nobility in the South. With them sitting at the top of the aristocracy. But then came the Republicans. And Abraham Lincoln. Who issued the Emancipation Proclamation. Freeing the slaves in the states in open rebellion. Then Ulysses S. Grant won the American Civil War. The Republicans pushed for and ratified the Thirteenth Amendment. Abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude. Then Republican President Grant sent federal troops into the South to protect the freed blacks. As the racist southern Democrats resisted integrating the freed blacks into the South. Eventually passing Jim Crowe Laws. Making the freed blacks a permanent underclass with the Democrats’ separate but equal status of the freed blacks.
Democrat Storm Thurmond has the record for the longest filibuster in U.S. history. He talked for 24 hours and 18 minutes in his opposition of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. For he wanted to keep blacks separate but equal. The southern Democrats opposition to civil rights was so strong that it prevailed through JFK’s administration. Who did nothing for civil rights lest he go against the powerful southern Democrats. Despite all the Republicans did the Democrats kept the black man down in the South. Dr. King fought against segregation in Albany, Georgia, in 1962. And suffered brutal police oppression in Birmingham, Alabama, that same year. Things were so bad during JFK’s administration that Dr. King helped organized the 1963 March on Washington. Where he gave his famous “I Have a Dream” speech. But real change would have to wait until Republican Richard Nixon became president. Who implemented the first large-scale desegregation of public schools in the Democrat-controlled South. And Nixon implemented the first affirmative action plan. The Philadelphia plan.
Yet despite all of this the Democrats claim the title of champion of civil rights. And dominated the 50th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Even though it was the Republicans who freed the slaves, fought against Jim Crowe Laws and desegregated the South. While the Democrats fought them every step of the way. Yet the Democrats are civil rights champions. While Republicans are racists. What’s wrong with this picture?
Tags: aristocracy, civil rights, cotton, Democrats, discrimination, Dr. King, Dr. Martin Luther King, Founding Fathers, Grant, I Have a Dream, JFK, Jim Crowe laws, King Cotton, Martin Luther King's, Nixon, nobility, Old World, paid-labor, planter elite, Republicans, separate but equal, slavery, South, Southern Democrats
Week in Review
No one appears to like Obamacare. But those with friends in high places can do something about it. Unlike the rest of us (see Congress to get Obamacare fix: reports by Michael Kitchen posted 8/2/2013 on Market Watch).
The White House has approved a deal that will create a regulatory fix for members of Congress and their staff related to some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, according to media reports. Under the law, popularly referred to as Obamacare, lawmakers and their aides were required to source health insurance “created” by the law or offered through one of its exchanges; and without the subsidies they currently have, the members of Congress would have faced thousands of dollars in additional premium payments each year, the reports said.
These members of Congress and their staff have health care plans that put other Cadillac health care plans to shame. And because they are so good they are very, very expensive. With premiums costing tens of thousands a year for a family. Because these are so expensive it would be unfair to have these people pay for them out of their pocket. So the government used tax dollars to provide a subsidy for them. About 75% of the cost of these policies.
Now, while the rest of us poor schmucks can’t keep the plans we like and/or are seeing our insurance premiums go up by great amounts guess who gets to keep the plans they have without having to pay an additional dime? Not us poor schmucks. Nope. But those who are apparently more equal than us poor schmucks. Those in the federal government. America’s aristocracy.
If you’re keeping count so far pretty much everyone on the left that helped pass Obamacare into legislation has received or is asking for an exemption from this atrocious piece of legislation. And guess where the best doctors are going to want to work? Not in the hospitals that take care of us poor schmucks with assembly line efficiency. No. They’ll be working in the luxury health care suites that cater to America’s aristocracy.
If you’ve ever wondered what it was like in the Old World with a noble class and a peasant class here’s your chance to experience it. As you will soon be living it. The more equal they make everyone else beneath them the more like a peasant class we’ll become. And this is the ultimate purpose of Obamacare. To make us their bitch.
Tags: America's aristocracy, aristocracy, Congress, federal government, insurance premiums, keep the plans we like, more equal, Obamacare
Week in Review
So who’s to blame for Detroit? The greedy. The greed of the public sector. Who stole as much as they thought possible from future generations. Laughing all the way to the bank. But never did they think that their greed would eclipse the paying-ability of those they were stealing from. Future taxpayers. Which is what happened in Detroit. And will probably happen elsewhere throughout the nation (see The Unsteady States of America posted 7/27/2013 on the Economist).
Nearly half of Detroit’s liabilities stem from promises of pensions and health care to its workers when they retire. American states and cities typically offer their employees defined-benefit pensions based on years of service and final salary. These are supposed to be covered by funds set aside for the purpose. By the states’ own estimates, their pension pots are only 73% funded. That is bad enough, but nearly all states apply an optimistic discount rate to their obligations, making the liabilities seem smaller than they are. If a more sober one is applied, the true ratio is a terrifying 48% (see article). And many states are much worse. The hole in Illinois’s pension pot is equivalent to 241% of its annual tax revenues: for Connecticut, the figure is 190%; for Kentucky, 141%; for New Jersey, 137%.
By one recent estimate, the total pension gap for the states is $2.7 trillion, or 17% of GDP. That understates the mess, because it omits both the unfunded pension figure for cities and the health-care promises made to retired government workers of all sorts. In Detroit’s case, the bill for their medical benefits ($5.7 billion) was even larger than its pension hole ($3.5 billion).
Some of this is the unfortunate side-effect of a happy trend: Americans are living longer, even in Detroit, so promises to pensioners are costlier to keep. But the problem is also political. Governors and mayors have long offered fat pensions to public servants, thus buying votes today and sending the bill to future taxpayers. They have also allowed some startling abuses. Some bureaucrats are promoted just before retirement or allowed to rack up lots of overtime, raising their final-salary pension for the rest of their lives. Or their unions win annual cost-of-living adjustments far above inflation. A watchdog in Rhode Island calculated that a retired local fire chief would be pulling in $800,000 a year if he lived to 100, for example. More than 20,000 retired public servants in California receive pensions of over $100,000.
This is an important point. People say that we must honor these lavish pension and retiree health care benefits because they made a deal. A contract with the city. Or the state. But did they? No. The public sector unions and the cities and states colluded together to steal money from future generations. Who were not a party to those agreements. This amounts to generational theft. And the generous size of those benefits just makes that theft worse. Transforming the public sector into an aristocracy. That cares little for the future taxpayers that they will be bled dry to pay for their long and comfortable retirements.
Detroit is just the first domino to fall. This generational theft is just unsustainable. Something has to be done. But what?
Public employees should retire later. States should accelerate the shift to defined-contribution pension schemes, where what you get out depends on what you put in. (These are the norm in the private sector.) Benefits already accrued should be honoured, but future accruals should be curtailed, where legally possible. The earlier you grapple with the problem, the easier it will be to fix. Nebraska, which stopped offering final-salary pensions to new hires in 1967, is sitting pretty.
In other words our public servants should not live a better life than their masters. Those people paying the bill. There should be no aristocracy in the United States. People in the public sector shouldn’t be able to retire young and live a long life in retirement while someone else is paying the bill. The taxpayer. People who have to work until they drop dead to save for their own retirement. That just isn’t right. If our servants in the public sector want that long and comfortable retirement then they must do what people in the private sector do. Save for it. Make sacrifices. And live more frugally. Because there shouldn’t be two Americas. Where one enslaves the other. While setting up a string of municipal and state bankruptcies because of their greed that threatens the financial wellbeing of the nation.
Tags: aristocracy, cities, Detroit, future generations, future taxpayers, generational theft, greed, Health Care, medical benefits, pensions, public servants, retirement, states, taxpayers, unfunded pension, unions
While the French embrace their Culture the Liberals in America attack their own Culture
What is multiculturalism? It’s a philosophy of diversity. Basically saying it’s our differences that make us great. Something you won’t hear a whole lot of in France. Where they have a single culture they promote. The French culture. And rightly so. Because it is the French culture that makes France great. Just as it is the British culture that makes Britain great. As the Spanish culture makes Spain great. As the German culture makes Germany great. As the Japanese culture makes Japan great. As the Mexican culture makes Mexico great. Etc.
In the United States of America, though, it’s not American culture that makes America great. It’s all of the other cultures in America. Which is why they teach multiculturalism. Where we must admire and respect every other culture. And they don’t teach assimilation. Where people in America assimilate into a single culture. The American culture. The one culture that is not worthy of admiration or veneration. Apparently.
Where did this start? It started with our educators at colleges and universities. As well as at our public schools. And the liberals controlling them. Who decided to do something about their hatred of America. In addition to the other things that they were already doing. Instead of teaching about American greatness they taught about American imperialism. They taught how the Founding Fathers stole America from the Native Americans. They taught how the Founding Fathers were nothing more than rich white slave owners. Who made a country to benefit rich white slave owners. So while the French embrace their culture the liberals in America attack their own culture. Basically saying America isn’t great. But everyone else is. That is multiculturalism.
Liberals are Smarter than Everyone Else and should be Running the Nation, not a Government of the People
Liberals hate America. They hate it so much that they have worked incessantly to change it. Like a cancer. Working from within. Invading our culture and institutions and slowly spreading. Just as socialism consumed Europe. The liberals wanted that in America, too. But liberals were, and still are, a small minority in the nation. Few think like they do. So they’ve always found great resistance to their enlightened ideals.
Their Ivy League schools created and nurtured liberalism. Rich people who inherited their money sent their kids to the Ivy League. And when they leave these schools many go into politics. Or policy think-tanks that influence politics. So these few, this privileged few, can change America. To reflect what they believe it should be. And run by like-minded people like them. An aristocracy. Something America shouldn’t have. But does because of people like them. Who are better and smarter than everyone else. And should be running the nation. Not a government of the people.
Liberals hate the principles of the Founding Fathers. They hate limited government. Laissez-faire capitalism. Free markets. A business-friendly regulatory environment. Low taxes. And the profit incentive. The things that made America the number one economy in the world. And the destination of choice for immigrants looking for a better life. One free from government oppression. Abject poverty. Chronic hunger. And corruption. People who were tired of living in a society where everyone was equal. Where some were more equal than others. So they came here. To get away from people like liberals. Who think they are more equal than everyone else.
Liberals enshrine Single Mothers and Same-Sex Couples raising Children to help destroy the Traditional Family
Because liberals are a small minority of the population they face great opposition. Which is why they have infiltrated our educational system. To set the educational curriculum. So they can take our children. And make them think differently from their parents. Who most likely think like the majority. And not like the liberal, privileged elite. The aristocracy. This is the greatest enemy of liberalism. Parents. And the family.
Parents have some 5 years to teach their kids to think incorrectly. That’s a 5-year head-start these parents have. Which the liberals have to undo. So they can start programming them to become good liberals. So they attack the family. To break the bond between the parents and their children. So they can start building a bond between these children and the liberal state. Which is a prime motivation behind global warming. For it was these children’s greedy, thoughtless parents that caused global warming. Because they were so greedy and thoughtless—or just too stupid—to care about the planet.
So liberals enshrine single mothers. And same-sex couples raising children. To help destroy the traditional family. And build a loyalty of single mothers and same-sex couples to the state. By providing financial assistance. Or new legislation to protect and help them. Ensuring that these people will make these children think correctly from the get-go. Which is why multiculturalism and diversity go out the window in the family. A mother and a father are different. They are a woman and a man. Who can provide a much broader cultural education than a single mother. Or a same-sex couple. Who can only provide half of the cultural experience that a woman AND a man can provide. So parenting is the one place in America that we don’t make better with diversity. For when it comes to children in the household there is nothing wrong with having a single cultural experience. No. Multiculturalism only applies after these kids leave the household. When they may start thinking incorrectly.
Tags: American culture, aristocracy, children, diversity, educational system, family, father, Founding Fathers, French culture, Global Warming, Ivy League, liberalism, liberals, mother, multiculturalism, parents, privileged few, same-sex couples, single mothers, traditional family
« Previous Entries