ELDER PATRIOT - Over twenty years ago while her husband was going through impeachment proceedings Hillary Clinton used the term vast right-wing conspiracy in an attempt to deflect attention onto conservatives.
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines conspiracy as:
: a secret plan made by two or more people to do something that is harmful or illegal
: the act of secretly planning to do something that is harmful or illegal
Over the ensuing years there has been little evidence of a “vast” right-wing conspiracy though the phrase has become part of the Democrat’s lexicon to denigrate conservatives. Any serious examination of the political landscape since Bill Clinton became president, however, would build a strong case for a vast left-wing conspiracy with moderate Republicans, all Democrats and large corporations joining ranks to fleece the United States citizenry of their freedoms and their wealth.
How this has been and, is being accomplished is through the empty promises of a political class that exists to serve their own selfish interests without regard for the citizenry. Like a player in a singles bar, the vast left-wing conspiracy promises their target things they have no intention of delivering on. Unfortunately, those who fall for these promises never see them fulfilled and wind up poorer for having fallen for them.
P.T. Barnum said, “There’s a sucker born every minute.” Given the historical record of failure of big government programs it would be more accurate to equate the liberal/progressive voter with the foolish girl who continually gives herself to the smooth talking lothario time after time and getting little in return. There may be no shame in falling for the line the first time or even the second time, but after a while everyone else sees you for the fool you are.
Historical proof of the vast left-wing conspiracy:
Social Security is a Ponzi scheme by any definition. A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned by the operator.
Keep this in mind the next time a politician talks about Social Security being a sacred trust and refers to a “lock-box” as though your FICA tax dollars have been securely invested. He’s lying, they haven’t. Social Security payments of today are being paid by the taxpayers of today. Any actuary will confirm that the program is bankrupt with unfunded liabilities approaching $100,000,000,000. The significant difference between a legitimate retirement plan and Social Security rests on the word unfunded. Legitimate retirement programs have the funds to cover their future obligations while Social Security doesn’t.
The program is so bereft of financial legitimacy that it pays less than half that private sector programs pay for the same contribution level at retirement. In all likelihood Social Security will eventually be bankrupt or the country will be in trying to support it.
Why did politicians play fast and loose with your retirement funds? The answer is simple; it allowed them to use the diverted funds for everything from corporate welfare to building more and larger constituencies of blind followers who were seduced by more false promises for the success of new programs. Corporate welfare invariably enriches the politicians who support it. New government programs provided new opportunities to further enrich themselves.
Welfare was a foundational building block of Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Poverty.” It has turned into little more than a war on the solvency of our country with over $22,000,000,000,000 having been spent on anti-poverty programs since its inception in 1965 with no positive results. This single initiative is responsible for more than our entire national debt. Any rational observer would conclude that by world poverty standards there is virtually no poverty in America.
Why do leftist and progressive politicians defend these programs so steadfastly in spite of the program’s half-century track record of failure? There are two reasons, protecting their growing and dependent constituency who fail to recognize that they have been reduced to a modern day form of slavery, and the opportunity for enrichment through corruption and patronage that the manipulation of $22T presents.
Minimum Wage arguments are based on the fact that over a forty-hour week a worker earning the minimum would be unable to support a family of four. While that may be true it is also irrelevant. The minimum wage is ostensibly for entry-level jobs to be paid to workers with no experience. That means young people who are getting their first taste of the discipline required for holding a job and who bring little more to the workplace than their need for direction.
Legislative initiatives and the politicians who propose them would best be judged through the use of a cost-benefit analysis. So let’s do that.
The first federal minimum wage set in the United States occurred in 1938. After over 75 years of historical data a disturbing trend emerges; every time the minimum wage is raised, employment sags. History has shown that the loss of jobs is especially egregious among black youths where minimum wage increases has resulted in unemployment rates over 33% and as high as 50%.
How does that benefit anyone? Well, for liberal/progressive politicians it provides two benefits; it mollifies their ignorant constituency who crave any suggestion of social justice, and it increases tax collections providing them more money to build their political empires.
Graduated Income Tax Rates are another canard that the adherents to liberal/progressive leadership support in their ignorance and to their own detriment. When overseas investments are taxed at lower rates than those here at home investment monies flow out of the country. In the process jobs are lost to United States’ workers.
Why would liberal/progressive politicians support this? Aside from the desire for social justice that their constituents, in their ignorance, somehow think benefits them, the result is increased dependency on government programs which is where they make their money through corruption and patronage. Two benefits for liberal/progressive pols and two losses for their sycophant followers.
Virtually every liberal/progressive program has failed to cure the problem it was intended to solve. Worse, these programs have exacerbated the problems they were intended to cure and have created new ones in their wake; like $18,000,000,000,000 in debt that will fall on the dwindling base of U.S. taxpayers.
Debt is a favored method politicians use to fund corporate welfare and bailouts because it also enriches international bankers who lend the money with the assurance of the full faith and credit of the United States. That’s means long after politicians disappear from public life you and your children are on the hook paying for these failed programs.
The facts speak loudly:
The rank-and-file liberal-progressive voter has chosen to remain ignorant and to rely on emotion when making electoral decision. What other conclusion can be drawn?
There is a vast left-wing conspiracy of politicians, bankers and corporate leaders hell-bent on enriching themselves without regard to you or your country. What other conclusion can be drawn.
