One of the common refrains that have been sung over and over recently is how that “going green” will help us to declare freedom from foreign oil—because we’ll need less of it. In essence, what our government is trying to tell us is that we are slaves to foreign oil, having to pay them lavish amounts of money and we are at their bidding to a degree.
The problem that I have is that this same government is selling us into slavery of other foreign countries—most notably, China—and yet they don’t seem to be singing about how bad that slavery is.
It seems that the government is fickle. They are fine with decrying the debt and control that one group of nations—those that make up OPEC—has over us, while simultaneously claiming that without China and Japan we’ll be reduced to a third world nation.
This seems a tad ironic as well as hypocritical, and not at all consistent.
The way to get out of debt not only includes lowering costs—which is what we are told that green energy solutions will do1—but it also includes not going further into debt.
Every time you read about a basic failure in monetary policy of a Republican President over the last few terms, it boils down to their willingness to cut taxes and let debt soar. This is as wrong as raising taxes and soaring debt—the current plans of our current President.
There is no reason that we cannot provide all the energy and labor that these other countries can provide, and we could do it efficiently as well as cheaply—except that we have so many rules and regulations in place that effectively prohibit us from being able to provide it.
The current crop of leaders believes in all of the government mandates and more regulation, but fails to accept the consequences of their decisions—both expected and unexpected.
When Japan wanted to get into the U.S. automobile market, they cut costs so that they did not make a profit so they could get in. When it was realized by the consumer that they didn’t have to pay as much for cars, the fact that the automobile industry had built up an entire business based on circumstances would change made them not able to compete. I believe they should have been allowed to fail, and then reborn. Instead, we prop them up, because we can’t see anything differently than we’ve always seen it.
We, as Americans, are fine with other countries pulling out of the ground and ocean, who have less controls and are prone to less oversight, but we forbid the country with the best technology from doing it on our own soil.
We force business owners to pay a living wage to teenagers, while at the same time wanting to pile on a health care insurance obligation and then expect them to compete with foreign business that pays their employees next to nothing because the cost of everything is less.
We preach about how great we are with human rights, and how fair we are, and yet we handicap our people in myriads of ways, and then, if they survive, we tax them more, and if they thrive, we pile on the punishment.
We reward those that don’t work—you don’t get unemployment if you do anything that resembles work, even if you don’t get a paycheck from it—and tax those that do. And we just want to keep extending benefits instead of getting out of the way.
America has a systemic problem, and the diagnosis is liberalism. We’re slaves to it, with its practitioners dangling the snake oil of “fairness” and “kindness” in front of us, while at the same time robbing people of their time, money, and abilities. Look at the result, don’t be blinded by the talk.
The truth is, they don’t care if we’re slaves, just so long as they can choose the master. Is it any wonder that they choose a socialist state as the one they want to be indebted to?
- I’m sidestepping the debate on this for now, and simply taking what they say at face value for the purpose of discussion.