My thoughts on the Occupy Together movementSubmitted by onesquarelight on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 14:22
I just read a little bit about the Occupy Together movement and it seems to be what I thought it was. Tax the rich, give to the poor (a very left idea that makes no sense). There is no such thing as a tax on the rich. Any tax increase to business is simply passed on to the consumer. So when government raises taxes on corporations they simply raise prices, kill job growth, move overseas, and reduce sales. Everyone ends up in a worse position than they started.
The lefts ideas always seem to be knee jerk in my opinion. It seems easy enough to say lets take from this group who has and give to the have nots. That seems good on the surface but it's not a sustainable solution. It's not sustainable because when you change the rules individuals adapt and make changes too. So that seeming well of money that lay in the hands of so few can be confiscated once but the problem of poor and rich will not go away. And if the confiscation continued, jobs, production, manufacturing etc. would be driven out of the parts of the world where the taxation and regulations are the strictest to more favorable areas. It's really a sure fire way to bring down the entire economy. Perhaps that is the point. I can't get on board with that.
Capitalism isn't the problem in my opinion. It is the monetary system of fiat money. It's interest rate manipulation by the fed and currency devaluation by a small group of bankers that control the entire countries medium of exchange.
The more useful and beneficial method of change is through currency reform. A free market money that benefits the people would be one that they choose. Any effort to correct matters by force of law is exactly that. Force.
When you use government to get your way what you are really doing is giving up rights. If I said that I wanted to have alcohol made illegal in hopes that it's abuse would become less frequent. Many would rally behind that because they agree with me. We'd petition the government to make a law and if passed we'd all celebrate. What really happened. We just confirmed the status of government as ruler over us.
What if down the road another group says we don't want anyone to be able to drive a car. Well I believe I have a right to drive but if I agree that government should be used to enforce the majorities moral beliefs on everyone else then I'd be a hypocrite to not oblige them to take away my freedom to drive.
Limited government is the answer and to achieve that each individual has to take more responsibility for himself and not reach to our rulers to force others to comply with his morality. The idea that might makes right is not correct. Our founders railed against Democracy as the preferred method of governance. That is why we have a Republic. In a true democracy the few are always ruled by the majority. This leads to all kinds of nastiness.