Thursday, November 06, 2008


I cannot be the only person who looks at the current economic situation and notices that the proposed "solutions" are little other than more--a lot more--of the same.

Chronic alcoholism has serious symptoms in people. The solution is not increased alcohol consumption.

The government's influence in the economy has been and currently is the problem. And yet, they're grasping for even more power.

What kind of person calls for more power, however undeserved? A tyrant. That's who.

Ever since the Panics of the late 1830s, ignorant people have called for more government in economic matters. History proves that this does not work. At best, the government seems to be able to create a very temporary "bubble" that inevitably "bursts," and ends up leaving things worse than before.

Isn't it about time we tried something else? Less government in the economy would be nice, but let's try no government in the economy. This hasn't been tried in the United States. Not ever.

However, the wealth in the United States correlates to the fact that, for the most part, people have had relative freedom in matters of trade. This means that the key to economic prosperity is less government involvement. Why not try the least government involvement? If it doesn't work, then we can always change.

By the way, "change" means--in verb form-- "do something different." In noun form, "change" means "something that is different." However, to most people who vote, it seems that "change" means to "do the same thing but more earnestly."

You can't change things by doing the same things, and you cannot vote for change by voting for the same lying bastards from the same lying parties who have been doing the same BS for decades.

1 comment:

  1. Not even if their party "leader" has more melanin than Thomas Jefferson? By the way, I think it would be cool if Obama was somehow related to TJ. It would have to be on his pasty-white mom's side, though, since I don't think
    TJ ever made it to Kenya.


Bill of Rights