Economic Failure: Following in the Footsteps of the Soviet Union

America is sick. We have no money, yet we are trying to solve everyone's problems--at home and abroad--with reckless abandon. According to the Government Accounting Office, to absolve America of the debt that our federal government currently owes, every single person in America would have to pay $140,000 right now. Where are you going to get that kind of spare change? Wait a minute...where are you ever going to get that much extra money in your whole life? Does that give you the idea that we have to do something drastic--and fast??

In the 1980's, the United States underwent an arms race with the Soviet Union. But that's not all. We sabotaged their efforts to bring natural gas to Europe, and we encouraged the Saudis to glut the world oil market so that the price of oil would go down. The result? The Soviet Union is no more. Socialism and empire building could not keep pace with the freedom of markets when it came to generating wealth--they never could, and they never will. The US won and the Soviets lost, and the world is all the better for it. Millions more people now live in freedom.

But you know the irony of it? America is on the same collision course with economic disaster as our erstwhile Communist enemy. Why? Because we have become socialist empire builders, just like the Soviets once were.

It doesn't work. But we act like we don't understand this simple concept. We're either lazy or stupid.

For the first time ever(?), the Canadian dollar is worth more than the US dollar. The US dollar, once the reserve currency of the world, is now being shunned more and more often in favor of a more reliable Euro. Here at home we contemplate buying health care for every American. Abroad we crusade with our tanks and daisy cutter bombs for 'liberty' for everyone else.

Socialist empire building doesn't work. We act like we don't understand this simple concept. We're either lazy or stupid.

And the debt continues to pile like a putrescent boil that is about to explode.

As it stands, all debts held by the United States of America would require every man, woman, and child in the United States to pay $140,000 if we were to retire that debt. That is so unfathomable that we can't even really comprehend that we are in a serious predicament! Maybe that's why we think we can afford to pay for every American's health care and Social Security. Maybe that's why we think we can afford to tilt at every windmill in the Middle East.

Glenn Beck reminds us that Congress thinks we can't handle that truth.
Unfortunately, the American people never got to see those [debt] numbers because they were pulled out of the 2004 budget just a few days after then Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill -- who had ordered the analysis -- was fired. And why were they pulled? It's simple; because our leaders in both parties believe that we can't handle the truth. Well they're wrong. What we can't handle are leaders who refuse to tell the truth.
Well, we'd better learn to handle that truth, or we're screwed. We'd better put in office a whole lot of representatives who want us to know what that truth is, because that truth is coming at us like a freight train.

We have no alternative but to elect representatives to every level of government that understand fiscal responsibility. We must elect leaders who stop wasting American money making problems around the world even worse. We must have as our lawmakers and executives those men and women who realize that, even for a mighty nation, we can only afford so much. If we don't, we are headed for the greatest bankruptcy the world has ever known.

If we fall, it will be much worse and much farther than the fall of the Soviet Union. We cannot afford to fall further into debt if we hope to remain a free nation.




Comments

  1. Couldn't have said it better Frank. This is the same reason that Hillary Clinton scares me to death. I am sincerely afraid that if she gets to the "highest office of the land" your grandkids won't see a free USA. It will be USSA, United Socialist States of America. I might even take it as far as to say my children will see that. It gives me the willys every time I think about it. I was out driving through the country by Deseret and Delta a couple months ago on my way home for Buffalo hunting wondering, "I wonder what all this would be like under a socialist government. I wonder what it will be like for my kids. Will they have the same opportunities we have now?" Who knows. Only time will tell. That, and the ignorance of voters.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's kind of ironic, then, that America's "empire building", "tilting at windmills" foreign policy around the globe began in order to stop Communism.

    I wonder if the real problem with the economy is not the government's debt, but our own.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Danny,

    I get all of Hillary's e-mails, and the latest one was a link to her site that basically said if you've been screwed by Katrina, Subprime Mortgages, high heating costs, or just about everything else, she has a PLAN to help YOU!!! Don't that just make you feel as warm and fuzzy as you've ever felt???

    ;-)

    Cameron,

    I'd like to state it differently. We stopped Communism for a very good reason, so not all of our foreign affairs at that time were empire building (i.e. Poland), but some admittedly were (i.e. putting the Shah on the "throne" in Iran).

    Since the end of the Cold War, however, I completely agree with your assessment.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's funny that you link socialism to the national debt along with the collapse of America. Every currency that is stronger than the dollar is tied to a socialistic government. Both Europe and Canada have national health care systems yet their currency is still strong. So I don't see how it all ties together.

    I do however see a very strong relationship between the debt-war-nation building-empire building-collapse of America. It is very clear that we are spending billions that we do not have on a war we should not be fighting. We need to close all military bases that are not located in the fifty states and territories and bring our troops home.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What I was implying, and, now that you ask, I'll come right out and say it, is this--the United States is FAR more socialist that we generally think we are. We have essentially as much control over health care provision and payment as any other country. The US government controls everything from tailpipe emissions to education to what a person can do on his own property to the communications spectrum. It makes far more laws than in the 18 categories it is allowed to by the Constitution.

    It is not a compliment to the countries of Europe, and Canada, etc. to say that they have a stronger currency than the United States. It is only an indication of where the US could be if it weren't equally (or more) socialist. Our empire building has a great deal to do with this, yes, but our socialism (much more than we tend to think we have) is also a major cause.

    The United States' brand socialism may not be recognized as easily as such, because we are more of the soft-fascist style of socialism, where government and preferred business are constantly in bed together, rather than government setting the rules unilaterally.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The sad fact is that we do not elect politicians that have a good understanding of necessary fiscal discipline. In fact, we hate them. This guy is good because he votes to "bring jobs" via government funding. This guy is bad because he votes to "cut spending" (translation: not spend as much as the socialists want), which will in turn "cost jobs."

    When we get a fiscal disciplinarian in office, we cricify him and kick him out the next time around. Oh, there are a small handful out there that survive from election to election. But for the most part, Americans like the idea of government providing increasing services for them (or their "poor" neighbors).

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, we have learned that it is possible to vote ourselves largess out of the public treasury, but it takes a lot more insight to understand why that is the last thing we should be doing.

    It's unfortunate that so few people vote for fiscal disciplinarians. Oh well, if the people don't decide for themselves that such representatives are important, reality will...

    ;-(

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

How LDS Censorship May Have Led to Less LDS Faithfulness: The Ronald E Poelman Conference Talk of 1984

Changing the Narrative of the LDS Church: 35 Years Later

"Mormon Leaks": What They Really Said-Senator Gordon Smith Discusses Politcs