|
.
.
CAPITALISM versus SOCIALISM
Senior Policy Analyst: Jane Smith
Capitalism versus Socialism is a complex and critical subject. Technically, we can program a computer to resolve
the matter quickly, yet, because the wealth of nations and the very lives of their peoples are involved, in order to even
begin such a debate, one's premises need to be accurate (=) and properly ordered.
CAPITALISM simply means that a person who works for wages is entitled to invest (spend/save) such
wages according to his or her own personal preferences...within the parameters of Constitutional Law, naturally. There is
nothing within the literal (=) parameters of the Constitution of the United States of America, punctuation included, as signed
by our Forefathers, which precludes capitalism. As such, capitalism is constitutional.
SOCIALISM simply means that the government funds social programs for the people (whereas, nationalism
is any government ownership of any corporation). The only government funding of social programs which the Constitution does
not preclude is giving Congressionally-valued gold and silver coins, land, and all freedoms not specifically precluded by
the Constitution (such as the right to assemble) to each citizen. As such, the United States Congress could, technically,
distribute 16 gold and 13 silver coins, with a value (based upon actual worth) of $39 Billion, to each man and woman who was
born and lives within the States and has retained sole American citizenship. If Congress gave land and such coinage, with
a caveat emptor, to each American citizen as a one-time-only grant for life and American family bequeathal, no government
funded social programs would be necessary. Nice idea, n'est ce pas? And we can afford it!
Under a capitalistic system, a business owner or collective has the right to create an organization
solely for profit. One, also, has the right to create an organization for the benefit of society, in exchange for profit or
not. One such "private" organization could, just as easily, be titled Medicare or Social Security and offer the same benefits
as our current government systems of Medicare and Social Security.
The problem with capitalism is not the notion of capitalism within a constitutional America.
Rather, the problem with capitalism, today, is that nearly 98% of America's laws today are quasi-constitutional. For
instance, loopholes are forbidden by the Constitution [Article IV, Section 2: The citizens of each state shall
be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.(period)],
yet, every major business within America thrives within the myriad legislated loopholes, while the honest patriotic citizen
(who stands by the literal parameters of the Constitution) pays the tab; thus, the constant unrest within America.
Removing the loopholes will, automatically, refill the coffers of the American Treasury, ensuring
a financially secure America, which, ultimately, benefits all American businesses, as well.
We business owners need not be greedy. We do, however, need to be ethical. America, above all, was designed
to be an ethical nation. As such, we are, all, morally obligated to be ethical.
Socialism's most diabolical flaw is that it is ultimately cost-prohibitive. One cannot tax a person
greater than 100% of his or her wealth. Within a relatively poor nation, such as Sudan, this leaves large numbers of people
without certain essentials AND without whatever monies they would have been able to keep within a capitalistic society. Scandinavia
already has a complex social system...their citizens pay 75% of their wages in taxes. 75%! They, then, use the other 25% for
rent, automobile, food, and clothing. What is within their savings accounts? What savings accounts?! This, however,
is the model to which our politicians have been turning, in recent years, as the pinnacle of New World Order [International
Government] politics.
America is not a poor nation...yet! At the current rate of socializing this once thriving capitalistic
nation, however, America's current financial woes will, someday, seem like a mere drip in a basin of financial carnage. For
this reason, although our Forefathers valued a sound education, the word "school" was, intentionally, excluded from the Constitution.
Thus, all publicly-funded schooling is technically (=) unconstitutional, with the exception of information (truths) which
can be "posted" by the Government. Even so, a private corporation has the right to create a large school system, for as long
as it does not force any child to attend. This can be especially useful at a time when our public school system is highly
socialized, sponsored by huge foreign corporations, such as Nike, no longer highly values the contributions of Benjamin
Franklin, and teaches 7 year olds about such non-school-related subjects as marriage, even against parental objection.
Those governments which prefer a socialistic governing system tend to prefer it because some capitalist
offered them a good deal on a large order of some private company product or service, id est: insurance. It is the same reason
China is coming up out of straight communism to socialism...they, now, know the discount value of purchasing massive quantities
of goods and social services from large capitalist American corporations.
Because a number of social programs benefit most or all citizens, "chipping in" to any program
of a size CAN benefit the group. A capitalistic version of such a program is the Automobile Club of America, whereas a socialistic
version of such a program is Welfare, which was introduced by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a publicly-admitted socialist who
publicly stated that he knew that Welfare and Social Security are unconstitutional, yet, did not know how to end the depression
more quickly otherwise...the same depression which was caused by a series of violations of the literal parameters of the Constitution,
as was the current depression! The problem is that there is no guarantee that your investment in such programs will benefit
you or those who use the services, such as "the bridge to nowhere". Moreover, you will be required to fund programs with which
you firmly disagree (a World War II example in Germany was the SS).
Unfortunately, even when altruism is the underlying motive of the creation of government social
programs, altruism tends to diminish as unholy leaders increase in power. Because we cannot guarantee their holiness, it is
a chance which we, as a society, cannot afford to take for the sake of our descendants, who would pay an extremely high price
for our lack of care and foresight.
A better idea, while America is swimming in socialism, is to offer each taxpayer a list of programs,
at tax time. The taxpayer can, then, check whichever programs to which he/she wants his/her tax monies applied and the government
cannot use his/her tax dollars for any other programs. It is, at least, somewhat more democratic this way.
Increasing socialism within America has lead to our current $13.4 TRILLION deficit, whereas, a
mere 58 years ago, the entire United States government (federal and state) functioned on $70.3 Billion.
In fact, America is not ever supposed to be in debt unnecessarily, according to the Constitution. However, "the stock
of the British PERMANENT national debt" is considered to be "public securities" ...read:
'debt is security'. Utter nonsense! ...from which some multi-citizenship,
debt-wrangling financiers are reaping massive profits, for no other reason than that they can
squeeze such profits from America due to the good faith and good graces of our unwitting American legislators.
America has, unfortunately, followed suit behind Britain ...we might as well have remained tied
to the motherland, at this rate. America's recent such "investment" in The New World Order, subsequently, caused the
current stock market crash which socialist economists said, just prior, was a mere transitional wave between pre-NAFTA and
"a global economy", aka: "The New World Order/International Government" (President GHW Bush, Sr., French President Nicolas
Sarkozy). Now, there is no way to save America, as a sovereign nation (having no authority above us other
than God, Himself, if He exists [for the atheists among you]), except by returning our governing system to WITHIN the LITERAL
(=) parameters of the Constitution! You heard it here.
|
