Hi John,
I'm gratified that I've been able to engage a mind as fine as yours in a discussion worth having.
Now that I've assuaged your ego, I'll trot this one out straight away. This is a conjecture that I first raised last fall during the campaign and it received either absolute silence or a stone wall response from the denizens of the Herbert Walker and Walker cabal. (For the slow elk, that'd be GHWB and his spawn, GWB)
Here's the premise: Slavery,per se, is bad, at least in the media, and in the minds of most school children. So a new method has been created (commencing during the Reagan administration) to enslave the middle and lower classes. It's called the national debt. This is a wonderful device by which the upper crust can annually extract 14% of the national booty comandeered in taxes for their own ends and pass the cost along to all the werkenstiffs who'll tolerate it through apathy and miseducation. Now, why is it that the so-called surplus or reduction in national debt has been abated so promptly by the new regime in Washington? Well, greed, first of all. But basically, because there was some degree of largesse transfered from the 29 prime dealers in government debt (who have a vested interest in maintaining the trade) into the bribery pot, oh sorry, I mean campaign coffers, of the present regime and we are seeing the silly Clintonesque notion of balancing receipts and expenditures on the part of government go by the wayside as we re-employ a very clever and subtle means of wealth transfer from the tax payer/slave to the bond holder. Enslavement. With a velvet glove.
Don't you just love how clever this scheme is? I do. Though I'm aghast at the chutzpah and the rapacity of the class of people who would perpetrate such a travesty on an erstwhile free people.
I'm asking you to think outside the borders of your experience, are you game? Can you see the nearly instantaneous ending of the budget surplus since December as a completely willful act on the part of those who see their own greedy benefit therefrom?
R. |
