Blog Archives

Fairness According to Tom

By: Tom Chatham

The government decides to make everyone equal by starting them off with the same thing and always gives everyone the exact same thing every year. The first year the government gives everyone five acres of land and $20,000 dollars to start their life with. Joe buys some wood and tools and builds a home and with the rest he buys a used truck. Fred builds a home for $50,000 dollars that is identical to his capitalist neighbor and finances it for 20 years, buys a new car that he has to pay on for 5 years then has a lot of wild parties until all of his money is gone, then he cries unfairness because Joe does not have the massive debt that he must pay off.

Next the government gives Joe and Fred an oak log of the exact same size. Joe cuts up the log and builds a bed, table, chairs and a sofa for his home. Fred cuts up his log and burns it for firewood. Once all of Fred’s wood is gone he cries of unfairness because Joe has new furniture that he does not have.

Next the government gives them both a bushel of wheat. Joe keeps the bushel for seed and plants a field of wheat to which he harvests 25 bushels. Fred eats his wheat and when it is all gone he cries of unfairness because Joe has a lot of wheat that he does not have.

Next the government gives them both a grain mill for grinding grains. Joe uses the mill to grind his wheat and sell it as fresh bread making him a handsome profit allowing him to start a bakery. Fred sells his mill and uses the money to buy beer and cigarettes. When the beer and cigarettes are all gone Fred cries of the unfairness because Joe has money and his own business.

Next the government gives them both $5,000 dollars. Joe uses the money to build an addition onto his home. Fred uses the money to go out to dinner every night and have wild parties. When Fred runs out of money he cries of unfairness because Joe has a bigger home than he does.

At the end of 5 years Joe has a net worth of $50,000 dollars, a small business, and no debt. Fred has lost his home and car because he could not afford the payments and now is homeless.

The moral of the story is, no matter how even everyone starts off, the decisions they make and how well they utilize their available resources determines how well off they are in the end. You can give a million dollars to a stupid person and they will soon be poor again. You can take a million dollars away from a smart person and they will just go out and make another million dollars. That’s life. Deal with it.

Advertisements

The Collective Ideology

By: Tom Chatham

Socialism is all about the collective. Everything is of, for and about the greater good. It is all done at the expense of the individual and personal property rights and privacy.

The root of the collective ideology is the need to have others make decisions for the individual. These individuals do not want to take the responsibility of making a bad decision and having to accept they made a mistake. They prefer to have the collective make the decisions and if they fail in some way they do not have to blame themselves but can blame others for their failure. This lack of responsibility gives them the childlike views they have of the world.

Since they can not fail of their own accord, anything they decide to do is possible and logical in their mind. When this lack of responsibility is challenged, they often become agitated and get mad. When their beliefs are challenged with facts and logic they respond with threats and insults that have little bearing on the issue.

These individuals react to situations with compassion and feelings rather than logic and knowledge. When anyone challenges these feelings they respond with accusations of being heartless and selfish. Anyone acting in a manner that benefits the individual is considered selfish. Any self promotion is considered destructive of the collective so individual rights are suppressed by these groups.

It is considered by the group that any acts or decisions are correct because the group agrees with them. In reality, the consensus of groups is usually wrong in most cases. This is called the herd mentality. Everyone feels the decision is correct because everyone else agrees. This usually leads to bad outcomes for the group but because no individual is held responsible for the decision, they feel they were right and the fault lies somewhere else.

With these bad decisions comes the reality of consequences. When the group think fails it is redirected at the individuals that do not conform to the group mentality. These individuals are blamed for the failures and are demonized by the group.

When individuals make their own decisions and succeed it is touted by the group as a result of the group effort and not the individual. When President Obama said “You didn’t build that”, this is what he meant. The group cannot comprehend individual accomplishment. This is due to the fact that most in the group could not achieve anything on their own because of this fear of responsibility. This is the basis of the idea that everyone is a winner and we are all equal in every way.

We are all born with equal opportunity but our individual skills determine how far we can go in life. It’s just a fact of life that some are endowed with more or better skills than others. Some people have a lot of book sense and some have a lot of common sense and a few are fortunate to have both. Some are very smart while some are very athletic.

It is these special traits of the individual that make the world function in an efficient way. These differences act like different size gears in a machine that give it the power and efficiency it produces. The collective mindset would have us believe we are all the same size gear. If this were true it would be a very limiting factor in our lives and culture.

In this collective there are leaders that espouse the collective ideology but they are very individualistic themselves. These leaders push the collective agenda but they are really acting in their own self interest while using the collective as a vehicle to fulfill their own selfish agenda. Actions speak louder than words. Just watch the actions of these leaders and they will show what they really are. It never fails.

The collective is a failed ideology that has been tried many times with the same results. In the end it destroys the individual incentive and delivers failure on a monumental scale. This collective spirit is once again rearing its’ ugly head and will result in the same outcome as before. It will end with poverty, despair and death for many.

The collective ideology should not be confused with the individual involvement in community. While the community may come together for a purpose it does so with the individuals seeking their own best interest. This self interest usually results in a beneficial result for the community as a whole. This is something the collective tries to accomplish by force but human nature usually prevents it. The childish and irrational actions of the collective ultimately prevent progress and cooperation that is beneficial to the population as a whole and usually ends badly.

This is the collective and it is slow, wasteful and irrational. It cannot make decisions based on logic or facts. It cannot create new ideas that work. It cannot see the errors it produces. It is blind, deaf and speaks in riddles and gibberish.

A recent statement by Rep. Keith Ellison shows the collective mindset for what it really is. He said, “The bottom line is we’re not broke, there’s plenty of money, It’s just the government doesn’t have it.” He also said, “The government has the right, the government and the people of the United States have the right to run the programs of the United States health, welfare, housing – all these things.” Ellison has introduced an income redistribution program called the Inclusive Prosperity Act.

Townhall’s Michael Schaus said the bill “optimizes the liberal progressive view of personal property.”

He added, “All wealth, according to Progressive Democrats like Ellison, is first and foremost property of the government. Personal wealth, and personal property, are what individuals are allowed to keep after government lays claim to what it feels is needed. Ellison’s idea that government can evaluate its fiscal abilities off of the amount of wealth he could potentially tax, demonstrates an eroding respect for personal property rights in this nation,”

Margaret Thatcher was correct when she said, the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money. The collective ideology that now runs this country is about to prove her right.