FT183: “Conservatives believe chivalry is not dead while liberals want to destroy the dreams of little girls.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 16th, 2013

Fundamental Truth

Liberals help Women delay Living Happily Ever After as Long as Possible

Conservatives believe in customs.  And traditions.  Those things that are tried and true.  Like the institution of marriage.  The foundation of the family.  Where a man and a woman pledge their love to each other.  To have and to hold.  From the day of their wedding forward.  For better.  For worse.  For richer.  For poorer.  In sickness and health.  To love and to cherish.  Till death do they part.  All the while living happily ever after.  As husband and wife.

Conservatives do not believe chivalry is dead.  Conservative men still place women on pedestals.  They stand up when a lady enters the room.  Holds her chair for her.  If it’s raining or cold outside a conservative will give his coat to her.  And open and close the door for her.  A conservative will shield her from danger.  And protect her honor.  Always treating her like a lady.

A liberal feminist woman, on the other hand, will say, “Don’t you dare open that door for me.”  For she is fiercely independent.  And wants nothing to do with chivalry.  She wants to be treated like a man.  Liberals, in fact, want women to have a career first then maybe consider getting married.  Or having children.  And not have the fairytale wedding all girls dream about.  Looking forward to the day when her Prince Charming will come along.  And sweep her off her feet.  No.  Liberals want to kill that dream.  And kill all romance.  Giving women birth control, access to abortion and the morning-after pill so she can avoid living happily ever after as long as possible.

Liberals believe being a Part-Time Mother is Good Enough

Conservatives don’t like high taxes.  Because a generation ago taxes were low enough that most everyone could raise a family on a single income.  But with the rise of the welfare state taxes have steadily risen.  Taking more and more of our paychecks.  Making it difficult for a woman to stay at home and be a full-time mother.  Which is why, today, many women are forced to be part-time mothers.  So they can earn a second income.  So they have enough left over in their paychecks after paying for the welfare state.

The family is the center of the conservative’s world.  Which is why they work hard to establish a career.  And vote to keep the tax bite as small as possible.  So they can afford to buy a house.  And begin raising their family.  With the mother staying home to be a full-time mother.  To give her children the best possible of all childhoods.  Having all of their material needs met.  A nurturing environment.  Created by a loving father and mother.  Who teach their children the customs and traditions that their parents taught them.  And help them with their school work so they get the best possible education.  So they, too, will one day be able to earn enough to raise their own family.

Liberals, though, believe in childcare.  In fact, they want state-funded childcare so women can return to work as soon as possible after having their children.  Leaving part of the raising and nurturing of their children to strangers.  As if children are a burden.  Like cutting the grass.  Something that they can farm out to other people.  As a working mother has better and more important things to do.  Like earning a paycheck.  Which is why liberals want state-funded childcare.  Because they believe being a part-time mother is good enough.  A working mother’s children may disagree with that.  But liberals are old-fashioned in this one respect.  They believe children should be seen and not heard.

Liberals encourage Women to stay Strong, Independent and Alone

Conservative policies tend to favor families.  They promote families.  While liberal policies make the family obsolete.  By trying to make husbands and fathers obsolete.  Liberal policies allow a woman to build a career instead of a family.  Birth control, access to abortion and the morning-after pill allow her to engage in consequence-free sex.  Liberal policies enable so many women to give it away for free that men see no reason to marry them.  Women earn their own money.  And with no children there’s no need for a woman to get married.  So she can stay strong and independent.  And alone.

Of course, today, there are a lot of women starting their families in their forties.  As they’ve discovered they want more than just to be strong, independent and alone.  They want a family.  They want children.  Their own children.  Before it’s too late for them to have children.  As waiting too long physically complicates things both for the mother and the child.  And there can be some emotional issues.  For a young child entering school with a 50-year old mother will be different from other children who have parents in their twenties.  And when they graduate high school their parents will be ‘grandparent’ age.  Perhaps not being there for their children when they start raising their own families.

Conservative policies foster the bonds between parents and children.   And grandchildren.  While liberal polices weaken these bonds.  By encouraging a woman to exchange a career and casual sex for marriage and a family.  Who may later in life discover that she wants to be married and raise a family.  But because she was a devoted follower of devout liberal feminist dogma those things are harder now.  And most likely she will have to do them alone.  As the men these women rejected to pursue their career likely found other women who wanted to get married and raise a family.  And even if those marriages didn’t last happily ever after they probably have grown children from it.  And may not be interested in doing it all over again.  As their children may still be consuming a large percentage of their paycheck.  Especially if they’re going to college.

And yet with every election cycle it is the conservatives that hate women and children.  Not the people that are destroying women’s lives by telling them to forget their silly childhood dreams of meeting prince charming, having the beautiful wedding and raising children.  Instead they should stay strong, independent and alone.  Forcing many women to miss or delay the greatest experience of their lives.  Raising their family.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT178: “Birth control and abortion are the greatest threats to liberalism. ” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 12th, 2013

Fundamental Truth

Liberals seem more Mainstream than they are because they hold Key Positions of Power

Liberals have one very unpleasant fact to deal with.  Theirs is a minority viewpoint.  According to Gallup (see Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S. by Lydia Saad posted 1/12/2012 on Gallup), the American people identify themselves in 2010 as follows: conservative (40%), moderate (35%) and liberal (21%).  And the above referenced Gallup poll shows that the American people haven’t trended far from these numbers since 1992.

So the liberal cause is an uphill battle to begin with.  As 79% of the American people do not identify themselves with their views.  Which are basically a bigger, activist government.  More rules and regulations in our personal lives.  More fun and less restraint.  More casual sex and less traditional marriage.  Keynesian economic policies where the government plays with interest rates, creating large asset bubbles (such as housing bubbles) which give us very long and painful recessions to undo the damage an activist Keynesian government makes.  Like the subprime mortgage crisis.  Anti-energy policies that increase the cost of energy so they can subsidize more costly green energy.  Free birth control and access to abortion on demand.  And Obamacare.  To name a few.

Some may feel that liberalism is more mainstream than the poll numbers suggest.  But that’s only because though their numbers are small they hold key positions of power.  They control the public schools.  And our colleges and universities.  They control the mainstream media.  And the entertainment industry.  Giving liberals a very powerful bully pulpit.  When late-night television ridicules conservatives millions of impressionable people see it.  And see how cool it is to ridicule conservatives.   Reinforcing everything they’ve learned in our public schools, colleges, universities, mainstream media and, of course, the entertainment industry.  Yet despite all of this the best they can do is to get 21% of the people to think like them.  To want what they want.  And to do as they want them to do.

A Liberal Woman uses Birth Control and Abortion to keep her Fertility Rate Lower than a Conservative Woman’s

Why is this?  Because of parents.  Perhaps the greatest obstacle liberals have in transforming the country into the European social democracy they want.  With them sitting atop the power structure.  Much like the aristocracy of the Old World where they were free to tell people to do as they say, not as they do.  For while forcing their highly regulated world upon us they will exempt themselves from the less pleasant things.  Putting themselves above the laws they don’t like but feel are in our best interests.  Which we would understand if only we were as smart as them.

And every time they turn around there is some parent trying to undo all of their work.  For they only have our children for less than a third of a day, 5 days a week.  Worse, they don’t even get our kids into their education camps, I mean, schools, until they’ve lived exclusively with their parents for 5 or 6 years.  If you ever wondered why the Democrats are always pushing for state-funded childcare this is the reason.  To get to our kids sooner.  Before their parents can warp their minds with non-liberal viewpoints.  Like not to fear the coming apocalypse of global warming.  In fact some of these parents are such poor parents that they’ll load their kids into a gas-guzzling, carbon-polluting SUV and take them on a vacation.  Letting a child enjoy being in a big, comfortable and safe vehicle out on the open road.  Before liberals can teach them later that all of those things are bad.  And wrong.  But the real problem liberals have with parents like these is that there are just so many of them.  Ironically, because of liberal policies that have altered fertility rates.  Thanks to birth control and abortion.  And their attacks on the traditional family.

Fertility Liberals vs Conservatives R1

Earlier we discussed replacement birthrates (see Aging Populations and Replacement Birthrate posted 7/8/2013 on Pithocrates).  The current U.S. population is about 314 million.  Using the Gallup numbers we calculated the number of liberals and conservatives in that 314 million and entered them into the beginning populations above.  We assumed a generation lasting 20 years where couples will each bring in 1.5 babies if they’re liberals.  Below the replacement birthrate.  And 2.5 babies if they’re conservatives.  Above the replacement birthrate.  A conservative couple will have on average one more baby than a liberal couple.  Because a conservative woman will live a closer life to the traditional family.  While the liberal woman may pursue a career and not be interested in having children.  Using birth control and abortion to keep her fertility rate lower than the conservative woman.

The Liberals’ Rise to Power was Slow and Steady via Incremental Change all but Unnoticeable to Each Generation

If we add the number of liberals and conservatives together (we’ll call it the L/C Universe) they total approximately 191 million people.  Where liberals make up 34% of the L/C Universe.  While conservatives make up 66% of the L/C Universe.  As we move through 4 generations we see how the population increases.  The liberal population grows 838%.  While the conservative population grows 2,463%.  Because of that extra baby per couple on average the conservative population grows over 5 times more than the liberal population.  Dropping the liberals down to only 16% of the L/C Universe.  While increasing the conservatives to 84% of the L/C Universe.

If you ever wondered why the Democrats are pushing so hard for immigration reform this is why.  The liberal elite know their policies to encourage women to do anything BUT have babies threatens their long-term hold on power.  That’s why they pander to blacks, women, the young, etc.  They shower them with benefits and/or policies that make their lives a lot more fun.  Such as free birth control.  And accessible abortion.  Things that really appeal to the young voter.  Because that’s what they have on the mind most of the time.  Casual and consequence-free sex.  By treating pregnancy as a disease.  To be prevented (birth control).  Or cured (abortion).  But in the wake of these policies is a dearth of new liberal voters.  Which they hope to replace with immigration reform.  Hoping that those they bring into the population vote Democrat.  Grateful for their path to citizenship.  To make up for all the babies that never were.  Thanks to liberal attacks on the traditional family.

Unless the liberals can take our children away from us sooner and keep them longer (to countermand any conservative education their parents give them) their lower fertility rates will push liberalism to extinction.  How ironic indeed that the very policies that liberals and conservatives bitterly fight over the most may lead to their fall from power.  Birth control.  And abortion.  The greatest threats to liberalism.  Their rise to power was slow and steady through incremental change.  Almost unnoticeable to each generation.  As will be their fall.  Unless, of course, they use extralegal tactics to get around the will of the people.  Such as ruling by executive order.  And using the courts to make law the Congress won’t.  But what are the odds of that ever happening?

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

More Forgotten Children die in Cars but there is no Demand for new Car Legislation

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 6th, 2013

Week in Review

Whenever a child dies accidentally because of a gun there is another push to pass gun control legislation.  While making derogatory comments about gun owners.  For if it wasn’t for these yahoos putting pressure on their representatives in Congress they would have already done the right thing.  And repealed the Second Amendment.  So there wouldn’t be guns in houses where children can find them.  But it is a little different when children die accidentally in other ways (see Baby boy dies after being left in car in Virginia by Clarence Williams and Martin Weil posted 6/6/2013 on The Washington Post).

An 8-month-old boy died Friday after he was apparently left in his mother’s car while she was at work, Alexandria police said…

Bergin said the mother intended to drop the child off at day care. It was not clear why she did not…

Also on Friday, Baltimore County police said a toddler died after being left in a vehicle in Lansdowne, police said.

A relative was supposed to take 16-month-old Sabriya Towels to a Head Start Center on Friday after picking her up at another location but instead drove to their home in Baltimore, went inside and slept for a few hours, police said.

Police said that about four hours later, the relative, who was not Sabrinya’s parent, went to the Head Start Center to pick up the toddler and realized she was not there. He then ran to his vehicle and found the girl inside…

The Web site Kids and Cars. org said that on average, 38 children die in hot cars each year after being trapped inside.

“Even the best of parents or caregivers can overlook a sleeping baby in a car,” the Web site says.

People who accidentally left a child in a locked car to die are not horrible people like those gun owners.  These people can be “even the best of parents and caregivers.”  While no such sentiments will ever appear about a gun owner.  Even though both may accidentally kill a child.  Horrible things to have to live with.  But is a forgetful person who doesn’t lock away their gun when the grandchildren come to visit any more horrible than a forgetful parent or caregiver who forgets a child in a car?  No.

Is this a commentary on today’s idea of what a woman should be?  Instead of a stay-at-home mom she should have both a career and a family?  As well as an intense schedule that can suck the life out of her?  While making her miss being a part of her children’s childhoods?  Instead farming a good portion of that out to childcare?  Perhaps.  Mothers should be able to enjoy being a mother without feeling guilty for not having a career, too.  For her job as mother is far more important and far more satisfying than any career she could have.  For even movie stars who have lives every woman envies does not feel complete until they become mothers.  And when they do we celebrate their motherhood.  And yet the left will disparage a woman who doesn’t pursue a career.  Choosing instead to be a stay-at-home mother.  As they did during the 2012 debate.  When someone said Ann Romney never had a real job in her life.  Because all she did was raise 5 children.

There are a lot of double standards when it comes to the left.  Whether it is the ‘best of parents or caregivers’ and ‘evil, rotten gun owners’ when it comes to the accidental death of children.  Or working moms and stay-at-home moms when it comes to their idea of a real woman.  Everything the left does has but one purpose.  To advance a political agenda.  Even if it means we place so many burdens on women today that they forget about their children in the back seat of their cars.  At which point they’ll rue forever the day they chose to build a career.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Women are Choosing to get Paid Less so they can have More Time to be Mothers

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 16th, 2013

Week in Review

If you listen to some politicians there is a war on women.  Especially in the workplace.  Where evil business owners pay women less than they pay men.  At least that’s what the data aggregate tells us.  That business owners are not only greedy but sexist.  But there appears to be more to the unequal pay between men and women than the data aggregate shows (see Let’s Not Forget, Many Working Moms Want To Work Less by Erika Christakis posted 6/12/2013 on Time Ideas).

It’s almost become a cliché to note that women are still under-earning compared to men in the workforce. But maybe this reality shouldn’t keep surprising us. The recent headlines miss an important part of the work-life balance story: plenty of working mothers are earning less than men because they want the sort of jobs and working arrangements which indeed pay less…

The benefits of part-time work are substantial. Parents can be wage earners and role models without, literally, losing sleep. They can preserve most of their professional identity and work skills but still provide support to a wider group of dependents than would be possible with a full-time schedule, and without going insane in the process…

It’s true that the trend toward part-time, benefit-free employment can be financially ruinous to individual workers. One fifth of the country’s jobs are part-time, and many are low-skilled, dead end positions. But it’s easy to overlook how unrewarding full-time employment can be for many people, too – especially when the researchers and reporters and pundits who write about workforce trends tend to have fascinating, flexible jobs with decent pay.

We should stop limiting what women and men value by insisting that everyone has the same work aspirations. Some of us don’t want to spend the most productive and precious years of our lives trapped at the water cooler with our ‘work spouses,’ and we’re willing to pay the price.

All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  Makes Jane a dull girl, too, as it turns out.  Apparently mothers want to spend time being a mother.  Oh, how the left must hate this.  What with their birth control, abortion and morning after pills.  They want to see every woman childless and working fulltime.  Preferably taking a job away from a man.  Earning a big fat paycheck.  And paying a lot of income taxes.  Perhaps the true reason the left wants women in careers.  Stay-at-home mothers pay no income taxes.  That’s the whole drive behind state-funded childcare.  To get women back into the workforce as quickly as possible.  So they can resume paying income taxes.  Which is why the left demonizes conservatives.  And the 1950s family.  The Donna Reeds and June Cleavers.  Who were happy to spend time raising their children.  The very thought of which makes the left want to collectively vomit.

Motherhood is not something to shun.  To disparage.  Or to attack.  Women aren’t less of a woman for wanting to spend more time with their family.  Instead of shipping their kids off to childcare so they can work fulltime.  Because one day they’ll stop and notice that their kids are no longer kids.  But going off to college.  And they’ll wonder where did the time go.  As well as their childhoods.  Wondering where they were when their kids grew up so fast.  Then they’ll look at the big house.  The two new cars.  The nice things in their home.  And the empty rooms where their children once played.  Then ask themselves, was it worth it?

A lot of women are saying “no.”  It’s not worth it.  So they’re taking part-time jobs so they can spend more time with their kids.  Which is why in the aggregate businesses are paying women less than men.  Because women chose jobs that pay less.  So they can spend time doing something more important.  And more fulfilling.  Being a mother.  And God bless them for it.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

President Obama has a Lot in Common with the Social Democracy Ideology of the NDP

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

The New Democratic Party (NDP) of British Columbia is a social-democratic political party.  Their political ideology is Social democracy.  And the Social democracy political ideology is to transform capitalism into socialism through progressive social reform.  And they do that with higher taxes and wealth redistribution.  In fact, the current NDP leader in British Columbia has pledged to raise taxes should they win the coming election (see NDP promises tax hikes if elected by Bryn Weese, QMI Agency, posted 4/11/2013 on Vancouver 24 hrs).

Corporations, banks, polluters and the wealthy will pay more if the BC NDP wins the provincial election.

The party’s fiscal plan, unveiled at Simon Fraser University Thursday, calls for: a one point rise in the corporate tax rate from 11% to 12%, reinstating a 3% bank tax, expanding the carbon tax to include vented oil and gas emissions, and raising the personal income tax rate to 19% on incomes over $150,000 a year.

The party, if elected, also plans to run the same $800 million deficits it alleges the ruling BC Liberals are hiding. In total, the NDP would run nearly $2 billion in deficits over the next three years until the party, it says, would balance the budget in year four of a NDP government.

“We’re looking at those who have a little more to give a little more,” NDP finance critic Bruce Ralston told reporters…

The fiscal plan is a broad look at how the NDP will pay for its election platform, which will be detailed during the campaign. On Thursday, the party promised a childcare and early-education plan and a poverty-reduction strategy.

Earlier this week, NDP Leader Adrian Dix proposed increasing the tax credits for TV and film productions in the province to 40% of labour costs.

Sound familiar?  It sounds a lot like what you hear coming out of Washington.  For the Obama administration wants to tax corporations, banks, polluters and the wealthy more.  In fact they’ve used the same language.  “We’re looking at those who have a little more to give a little more.”  The Obama administration is running deficits.  President Obama even talked about expanding funds for childcare so children as young as 4 years old can receive state indoctrination.  I mean, early developmental skills.  The Obama administration has a poverty-reduction strategy.  They call it food stamps.  Some have even called him the food stamp president because more people than ever use food stamps.  And the Obama administration as a special relationship with TV and film production.  He even changed his stance on same-sex marriage in exchange for more Hollywood campaign donations.

So what does this mean?  Does it mean that President Obama is a Social democrat, too?  Because he shares the same political ideology of the NDP?  Social democracy?  Does this mean President Obama wants to transform capitalism into socialism through progressive social reform?  Of course not.  Just because it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it doesn’t mean President Obama is a socialist-leaning anti-capitalist.  It’s just a coincidence that he looks like, walks like and quacks like a socialist-leaning anti-capitalist.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT165: “Republicans vote as responsible adults while Democrats vote as selfish children programmed to hate and fear Republicans.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 12th, 2013

Fundamental Truth

Our Public Schools teach our Children that Capitalism is Bad and Government is Good

The Democrats want some form of national childcare.  President Obama just said that he wanted 4 year olds in preschool.  Some political operative just made a video saying that we need to destroy the notion that children belong to their parents.  And get people thinking more collectively about their children.  That they belong to the community.  Not to their parents.  So why this push to take children away from their parents and place them into institutions more controlled by the state?  For one reason.  To make them think ‘correctly’.

Our public schools teach our children at an early age about global warming.  Why?  There’s nothing children can do about it.  And it’s likely not man-made.  For the glaciers moved their farthest before man ever put warming emissions into the atmosphere.  So why scare them of an impending global warming apocalypse?  Filling their heads with things to give them nightmares?  Because it is useful to make them fear global warming.  Useful how?  Well, who is it that is supposedly causing global warming?  Businesses.  Corporations.  In general, capitalism.  In particular, unfettered capitalism.  Which teaches children what?  That if left to its own devises unfettered capitalism will destroy the world.  So we need government to act like cops.  To protect these children, their families and the world from these evil and greedy corporations that are trying to kill people with global warming.  Just so they can make a buck.

This is what they’re teaching our children in the public schools.  That unfettered capitalism is unfair.  Cruel.  And will kill us to make a buck.  So our children learn the evils of the profit incentive.  And the goodness of government.  They teach our children how FDR, LBJ and President Obama made the country better.  By preventing the evil corporations from running wild in pursuit of profits.  They don’t teach them how America became the world’s number one economy with the greatest liberty and highest standard of liberty because of unfettered capitalism.  Or why this was the reason people immigrated to the United States.  No.  Instead they teach them to fear corporations.  And support unions.  Because unions like government stop the evil corporations from hurting people to make a buck.  They’ll even hold picket signs for their teachers when they go on strike.  Teachers repeat this lesson over and over again.  Corporations bad.  Capitalism bad.  Unions good.  Government good.  So when they start voting they will vote ‘correctly’.

Someone has to Teach People to have Negative Views of Republicans because they’re not Born with Them

So this is why the Democrats want to take children away from their parents.  So they can start teaching them how to think ‘correctly’.  So they will vote ‘correctly’.  And when our kids get to college they take it up a notch.  Back in the Sixties radicals protested at college campuses.  Protested the Vietnam War.  Wearing shirts with pictures of communist icons like Chairman Mao and Chez Guevara.  They wanted to establish communism in the United States.  They hated the profit-incentive.  And corporate America.  They wanted to abolish private property.  Make everything communal.  They even lived in communes.  Just like the communists they so admired.  Even though the communist utopias in the Soviet Union and The People’s Republic of China oppressed and killed their people if they didn’t think ‘correctly’.

They wanted a world where everyone had whatever they needed without having to work for the man.  So they could spend their days the way they believed people should pass their days.  Getting high, engaging in free love and singing songs about love.  These radicals then changed their tactics.  Instead of fighting the system from the outside they began fighting it from the inside.  By becoming college professors.  Now they are teaching our kids.  And writing the curriculum.  Even those who went to jail for acts of domestic terrorism are joining the faculty at our colleges.  And those who avoided jail on a technicality.  Liberal Democrats revere these people.  And the students they’re programming to become good liberal Democrats love them.  For they, too, want to enjoy a life full of drugs and sex.  They see these radical professors as enlightened.  For they find nothing wrong with enjoying the moment.  Instead of sacrificing for the future.  Like their parents did.  Who always frowned on their having a good time.  Most colleges today lean left.  And the radical Left keeps out the riff raff.  Conservatives.  Who are just too much like these students’ parents.  And bestows tenure on those who think as radically as they do.  While denying it to those who don’t.  Those conservatives.

Conservative students have recorded some of these classes.  Where we can hear liberal professors telling their captive audience that Republicans are all racist white men.  And are the most inflexible in their thinking.  Stubborn.  And mean spirited.  That they hate minorities, the poor and women.  Even want to prevent them from voting.  They want to put blacks back at the back of the bus.  And women back into the Fifties where they’re barefoot and pregnant.  Are these isolated incidents?  Or is this what they teach all of our children?  Well, if you watch the Daily Show, Saturday Night Live, most any television sitcom, most any Hollywood movie or watch the network news you have to believe this teaching is pervasive.  As no one is born with political views someone had to teach these people to have these negative views of Republicans.  And who teaches our kids?  Our public schools.  And our colleges.

Liberal Democrats don’t Engage in Debate but Instead Lie and Launch Personal Attacks

The liberal viewpoint is a minority viewpoint.  Only about 21% of the people identify themselves as liberal.  While 35% identify themselves as moderate.  And 40% identify themselves as conservative (see Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S. on Gallup).  So those wishing to implement a liberal agenda have their work cut out for them.  Because about 75% of the people don’t think like they do.  That is, not yet.

This is why the president wants to get 4 year olds into state-paid childcare.  And why liberals want to take our children away so the state can raise them.  So the liberals can get them while they’re young.  And diminish the influence of their parents.  Especially when those parents are conservatives.  Who resist the liberal indoctrination of their children.  And undo some of the hard work they’ve done in getting these children to think ‘correctly’.  Which is a big problem for liberal Democrats.  Because they can’t win on the merits of their policies.  Not when 75% of the people don’t think like they do.

So liberal Democrats teach our kids to fear and hate those who don’t think like they do.  And they mock, belittle, disparage, demean, deride, etc., these people who don’t think like they do.  They don’t engage in debate.  They lie.  And launch personal attacks.  Which our high school and college kids find so entertaining.  They fill the audience at the Daily Show and the Late Show with David Lettermen.  They may not understand the issues.  But they know that they should laugh.  And how they should vote.  For they know that corporations are bad.  Capitalism is bad.  While unions are good.  And government is good.  The cool people they admire so much are liberal Democrats.  So they, too, are liberal Democrats.  And until they learn from age and experience to vote like adults they will continue to vote as self-indulgent children.  Living to maximize the pleasure of the moment.  No matter the long-term consequence of their actions.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Britain wants Parents to choose Work over Raising their Children

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 24th, 2013

Week in Review

Once upon a time children didn’t have much of a childhood.  In feudal Europe they were born on the land their parents worked.  And they worked the land, too, as soon as they were physically able.  There were no child-labor laws then.  The landowners’ children no doubt enjoyed their childhoods.  As they didn’t have to work.  The wealthy few enjoyed their lives.  While the masses labored away in physical labor.  With no chance of leaving the land they were born on.  For who your parents were determined your lot in life.  With no way to change that.

Until the British ushered in the modern world.  The rule of law.  Representative government.  The Industrial Revolution.  Laissez-faire capitalism.  Free trade.  The necessary things that allowed a middle class.  The chance of upward mobility.  And the nuclear family.  The working father.  The stay-at-home mother.  And children the parents dedicated their lives to raise.  Where children were wanted and loved.  And not just the pain in the ass they are today (see Parents ‘to be able reclaim up to £1,200 of childcare costs’ posted 3/19/2013 on BBC News UK Politics).

Britain has some of the highest childcare costs in the world, with many people with two or more children saying it does not make financial sense for both parents to work…

To be eligible for the new support both parents will have to work – or the one parent in the case of lone parent families – and each parent must be earning less than £150,000 a year.

In two-parent families where one parent does not work, families will not receive support – which is said to underline the government’s support for making work pay…

Mr Cameron said too many families were finding paying for childcare “tough” and were “often stopped from working the hours they’d like”…

Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg said he wanted to help “every family to get on in life”.

He said: “The rising cost of childcare is one of the biggest challenges parents face and it means many mums and dads simply can’t afford to work.

“This not only hurts them financially, but is bad for the economy too. This announcement of a £1bn investment in childcare will make sure it pays to work.”

Making work pay?  Working the hours they’d like?  Can’t afford to work?  What’s more important in Britain?  Family?  Or paying taxes?

Taxes are so out of hand that parents need childcare because they can’t get by on one income.  Like they did before.  But they can’t now.  Why?  What’s the big difference between now and then?  Taxes.  The government grows.  It gives away more stuff.  A college education.  Health care.  Pensions.  But that generosity costs money.  And with an aging population there is only one way to pay for this generosity.  Raising tax rates.  And adding new taxes.  Creating such a large tax burden it leaves people with less disposable income.

The tax bite grew so much that if you were middle class and wanted children it took two incomes.  Making children more of a nuisance than the pride and joy of parents they used to be.  So we become dumping children off at childcare.  Where they entered a cold, institutional childhood.  Instead of the warmth of a nurturing stay-at-home parent.  Is it any wonder why society has become more violent and crime ridden?  Children who see themselves as a burden.  Perhaps feeling unloved.  Or unable to feel empathy.  Perhaps even a little bit angry.  Put it all together and you get societal decay.  And a disincentive to having children.  Leading to an aging population.  Requiring further tax rate hikes.  And new taxes elsewhere.  Which makes it even more difficult to raise children.  So that additional government spending to address one problem only exasperated the problem they were trying to solve.  No.  To help families the state needs to reduce the tax burden.  Not increase it.  Which means they need to cut government spending.  Not increase it.

This would help families raise children.  Even allow a stay-at-home parent.  Which will allow children to grow up in a warm, nurturing family.  Not a cold, sterile, state childcare system.  Where parents will chose their children over having a second income.  Even if it means less tax revenue for the state.  However much that may displease the state.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

It’s becoming Too Expensive to Raise a Family in Singapore so Fewer are Raising Families

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 7th, 2012

Week in Review

Raising a family is expensive.  Once upon a time you could do it on one income.  But now with huge welfare states requiring heavy taxation one income rarely cuts it anymore.  It takes two.  Childcare.  And more cooperative employers.  For without all of this young people just won’t be able to afford to raise a family (see Survey: 50% couples not have babies because ‘Money No Enough’ posted 10/6/2012 on TR Emeritus).

According to a recent survey conducted by voluntary welfare organisation ‘I Love Children’, about 1 in 2 couples (50%) said not having enough finances is the main reason for not having children…

‘I Love Children’ is a voluntary welfare organization set up in September 2005 with a purpose of keeping Singapore young — by advocating a higher priority to having children, and promoting a society where children are loved and mainstreamed. It hopes to inculcate the value and importance of parenthood and family among Singaporeans, as well as encourage a children-friendly environment in Singapore.

To keep Singapore young.  All nations would like to keep their nations young.  To have an expanding population growth rate.  So they have more young workers entering the workforce than older workers leaving the workforce.  Why?  To avoid the financial crises they’re having in Europe.  Japan.  The U.S.  And like they will probably soon have in China.  Where all of these nations have an aging population.  Where more people are leaving the workforce while fewer are entering it to replace them.  So the tax base is shrinking.  As is tax revenue.  And this at a time when government spending on pensions and health care for the elderly is rising.  Which means fewer and fewer people will have to support more elderly people in their retirement.  As the tax base dwindles governments replace that lost revenue with more and more borrowing.  Leading to those financial crises.

At the dialogue session, 26-year-old Ms Gillian Neo, said, “Currently, infant care in Singapore is still quite expensive. Even the more affordable ones, after government subsidies, is still $700 a month…”

During the the dialogue session, young parents also said that flexi-work arrangements are a major incentive as that will enable them to spend more time with their children…

However, there is still a lot of resistance in the mentality of some of the management of companies towards this mode of working.

“I was offered a full-time work from home arrangement with my previous employer… Six months into it, it really fell flat on the ground. One of the reasons was my immediate supervisor was really not supportive of the arrangement,” said Mandy Loh, a freelance writer…

She said, “In fact, there have been studies done by the employers federation, for instance, to show that for every dollar spent on flexi-work options, the return is S$1.68.”

Madam Halimah also suggested that flexi-work arrangements could be used to attract people to work for SMEs [small and medium-sized enterprise], which are currently facing a labour crunch.

The problem is not lack of affordable childcare.  The problem is that a high level of taxation (often to support an aging population) requires two incomes to raise a family.  Children are not supposed to be a nuisance that we dump off at childcare while we go to work.  They should be raised in a loving family with a full time stay-at-home parent.  A role typically filled by the mother.  The CEO of the house.  While the husband works full time to pay the bills.  Parenting is a team.  It takes two to raise a family.  A mother and a father.  Not a childcare facility.  And, no, this isn’t discriminatory to women because they can’t have a career and be a mother.  It’s what’s best for the children.

The working mom also comes with some baggage.  Especially if she is a key person on a project.  Because a snow day may pull her out of the office when they call an emergency meeting.  If a child falls ill she may be out of the office for a few critical days of the project.  If a meeting runs long because of a crisis she will still have to leave at 4:00 PM to pick up her kids from daycare.  If a project requires an emergency trip to another state she will not be able to go.  School holidays and half-days will take her out of the office, too.  These aren’t hypotheticals.  Many of us have probably experienced this in the workplace.  This is why employers are reluctant to hire single moms or single dads.  And a little reluctant to hire a married mom with young kids.  Because it is often the mother and not the father that will miss work for the kids.  As the father’s career will be more established because of less time missed for the birth of their children.  It’s not unfair.  Men and women are just different.  Women give birth.  Men don’t.

Emphasizing a woman’s career over her children has put more women into the workforce.  Which has allowed greater government spending.  This is why governments want state-provided childcare.  Because they want to get women back into the workforce as quickly as possible so they can resume paying taxes.  Which governments can never seem to collect enough of with an aging population.  Making it ever more difficult for young people to have the children governments want them to have.  To bring new taxpayers into the workforce.  So bringing women into the workforce probably hurts in the long run more than it helps.  For it allows the government to spend more.  But it also discourages young people from raising families.  Leading to fewer children.  An aging population.  And a shrinking tax base.  Which will probably be made up with more government borrowing.  As more nations join those in Europe, Japan, the U.S. and probably China who are suffering from the pressure of aging populations.  And the financial crises they cause.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

High Taxes and Regulatory Costs create Childcare Crisis in Australia

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 5th, 2012

Week in Review

Parents can’t return to work quickly enough in West Australia after having their babies.  Because they can’t afford to be stay-at-home parents (see Working parents struggle to find carers for children by Rhianna King posted 8/1/2012 on The West Australian).

WA’s childcare sector is at breaking point, with critical shortages forcing parents to cut back their work hours or resort to hiring nannies…

Debbie Mashford, from Goodstart Early Learning in Edgewater, said the shortage was partly the result of more parents returning to work sooner…

The association is calling for a 30 per increase in the childcare benefit for parents of under-threes, which they claim would encourage more parents back to work and allow centres to fund more places…

Federal Minister for Early Childhood Kate Ellis said the Government wanted to remove the obstacles to longer opening hours at childcare centres.

“So many parents have the stress of having to ensure they rush out of work by ten past five to get through the traffic and collect their children by 6pm,” she said.

I never attended any childcare.  My dad worked.  And my mom worked longer hours at home raising the family.  The childcare issue is masking a much bigger problem.  Why can’t families survive these days on a single income?  And the answer to that is, of course, higher taxes.  And higher regulatory costs on businesses.  All of which have raised prices.  While shrinking take-home pay.

All of this results from increased government spending.  That’s the problem.  They add new bureaucracies to government.  Requiring more tax revenue to fund them.  New regulatory policies increase the cost of business reducing the number of employees they can hire.  Leaving more people dependent on government benefits.  Which is more government spending.  Paid for by higher taxes.  And then there’s the carbon tax.  The biggest boondoggle of them all.  Which just hammers power plants.  Increasing the cost of electricity.  Increasing everyone’s electric bill.  Both consumers and businesses.  Requiring further subsidies to those who can’t pay their electric bills.  And then there’s the carbon tax on the consumer’s utility bill.  It’s just all too much.  And the reason why West Australian families can’t make it on a single income.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

FT113: “In the liberal war on women their number one enemy are stay-at-home mothers not on welfare.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2012

Fundamental Truth

Plato’s Perfect State included Selective Breeding, State Rationed Health Care and Euthanasia

Liberals are fans of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato.  And his utopian idea of the perfect state.  Which he passed down to us in his Republic.  His book of fictional conversations where Socrates engaged in dialogs to develop and advance his philosophy.  His utopia?  A totalitarian state.  Where everyone sacrifices for the good of the state.  Sound familiar?  Think of Marxism, socialism, communism, fascism, National Socialism, Islamism, etc.  Where the state provides the basic necessities of life.  And frowns on luxuries, liberty and free speech. 

In Plato’s world everyone is equal.  Only some people are more equal than others.  The Guardians of the state are the wisest and brightest and make all the decisions of this perfect state.  These are the most equal.  Then came the state bureaucracy.  Those who manage things for the Guardians.  Then came the reeks and wrecks of society.  The expendables.  The undesirables.  Who are little more than slaves.  Or are slaves.  The workers who get their hands dirty while providing for the state.  The Guardians maintain these divisions through selective breeding and propaganda.  Making the people believe the separation of these classes is just and right.  And nothing to question.  Even to accept the selective breeding to produce a super race.  Or to learn not to question it.  The perfect state includes a national health care system.  To manage the super race.  That determines who to treat based on their usefulness to the state.  And who to euthanize because they have no state value.

Plato’s perfect state destroyed the family.  People lived communally.  The state took away babies from mothers and raised them ‘correctly’ to grow up to best serve the state.  Determining their level of ‘equalness’ and placing them accordingly.  Educating the children in the public education system.  Where the most equal make it to the Academy.  The state-run college.  Where the wisest philosophers of the state indoctrinated the new Guardians.  And educated the state bureaucrats.  To ensure that only the best stock entered their schools they managed the mating between men and women and forbade cross-class mating.  To maintain the purity of the classes.  Especially the higher classes.  A society where all children grew up loyal to the state.  Not to their parents.  To promote the superiority of the state.  And the subjugation of the people. 

Abortion and Birth Control helps the State Limit the Birth of People they Deem less Desirable

This is the liberal utopian view they see for America.  Where a kind and just government grows to protect the people.  Where the smartest people run things.  Who know what’s best for the people.  And decide for the people.  For the people aren’t wise enough to know what’s best for them.  Just like in Plato’s perfect state.  The wisest and brightest advance through the most prestigious of America’s universities.  And enter leading positions in the government.  After learning what the ideal state should be.  Progressive.  And subjugated to the state.  Lower universities train future state bureaucrats to embrace the ideal state.  Emphasizing fairness and justice.  And shared sacrifice.  Pointing out the cruel unfairness of capitalism.  And the kind, loving care of the government.  They will manage the state for the enlightened leaders.  While the lower classes are kept uneducated.  And dependent on the government.  Where they provide a critical service for the state.  By making the government necessary for most to survive.  To get around the repugnant restraints of democracy.  By having people continuously vote for the state to subjugate them.  Thus disciplining the masses.  And keeping them in their place.  At the lower end of the social strata.  And away from the upper classes.

The Holy Grail of large, interventionist government has always been national health care.  For it extends the state’s control to almost every facet of the people’s lives.  For they can tie anything into being health related.  And thus subject to the state’s regulation.  Also, this power over life and death serves another purpose.  Spreading limited resources over a larger group of people requires rationing of health care treatment.  As determined by the wisest and the brightest.  Who will direct their bureaucrats in the rationing of health care treatment.  Determining who’s too sick for treatment so they can use that treatment, instead, on someone more beneficial to the state.  A passive euthanasia policy.  Until the people will not object to a proper active euthanasia policy.

At the other end of the spectrum is abortion and birth control.  Which they make plentiful and easy to get.  Especially for the lower classes.  To limit the birth of people the state deems less desirable.  Those who give in to their animal passions instead of sacrificing for the state.  A common problem with the people in the lower classes.  Who lack a proper college education indoctrinating them into the proper behavior that best serves the state.  These lower class people are useful to the state by keeping the government necessary.  But at the same time they upper classes of government don’t want to be overrun with these people they see as inferiors.  Birth control and abortion helps the state to keep the births of this class at more acceptable levels.

Liberals hate Stay-at-Home Mothers because they Sacrifice for their Family and not the State

But this causes a bit of a problem.  By limiting the birth of the state-deemed undesirables they are also limiting the number of voters who will ask the state to subjugate them.  Which is a problem because the upper classes aren’t having a lot of kids themselves.  Women are too busy with their careers for the inconvenience of family.  Unless they’re rich and can afford to nanny it out.  As the properly educated higher classes enjoy sex without the consequence of children they cull the stock of the higher classes.  Leaving only one group embracing the family and having children.  Those who reject the state’s view of the perfect society.  Enjoy sex.  And like making babies.  Who they raise.  Some even becoming stay-at-home mothers.  Devoting everything to their families.  While their husbands provide their financial needs they take on the full-time job of parenting and managing the household.  On call 24/7.  Even taking their work with them on vacation.  And all without any help from the government.  Fully independent.  Responsible.  And free.  Which is a great threat to the ideal state as envisioned by Plato.  And every totalitarian state since.  These people who put family first instead of the state.  These people who don’t even need the state.

The state wants women to work.  If they have children, they want these women to return to work as quickly as possible.  To break up the family.  To separate their children from their parents as soon as possible.  Putting their children into state-sponsored childcare.  To begin the indoctrination process.  To make them loyal to the state and not their parents.  Which is why they love the two-parent income required to raise children today.  It helps to separate children from their parents.  Putting kids into after-school programs to further their indoctrination.  Better yet are the single mothers.  Who become fully dependent on the state.  And teach their children to love the state.  Because only the state provides.  Unlike the father that abandoned them.  These single mothers are the most likely to vote to further their state of subjugation.  To become fully dependent on the state.  And forever obedient.

This is why liberals today have a war on women.  In particular, the stay-at-home mother.  Who they hate.  And attack at will.  For choosing to be a stay-at-home mother.  For focusing too much time on their children.  For being too involved in their children’s education.  And for teaching their children to be independent and responsible.  Undoing years of the state’s indoctrination in the public school system.  These women are enemies of the perfect state.  Because they sacrifice for their families.  Not the state.  Worse of all, these most disobedient of women are having too many babies.  The real reason why the state hates them so.  Because if they can’t get rid of that problem they call democracy they will need to keep winning elections.  Which will be harder to do when each subsequent generation of like-minded voters is smaller than the last.  So their super race will disappear over time.  As will the perfect state.   For selective breeding will only work when people breed.  But not just any people.  It has to be the right people.  Not these stay-at-home mothers.  Who don’t sacrifice correctly.  And don’t subjugate themselves to the state.  As liberals believe they should.  Because liberals love Plato.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,