Giving Back: Taxes, Welfare, and Reform.

In the polarized world of politics no single term evokes more illogical outrage than welfare. Those on the right call it a "moral hazard" while those on the left call it a basic government function. As is stands right now I would call it a necessary evil. Slightly reformed however welfare could become a national asset which both right and left would have reason to protect.

Before we go any further I would like to define the term "welfare" as it will be used in this post. Welfare includes unemployment, food stamps and  any other direct monetary payment from the government to the individual outside of Social Security and Disability. As it stands, practically, those who apply for welfare benefits are given few responsibilities and have no other requirement other than proving a sufficient level of poverty or lack of employment in order to receive government money. How is it that those who receive from society are not required to give back to that same society?

Think of it this way. I for example work about 45 hours a week. Of those 45 hours 9 of them are taken out by the government in the form of taxes. Since I am not receiving money for those 9 hours I am essentially working for free. I don't mind this however because I know that those 9 hours a week are going towards my share of essential service that I receive from the government. These services include, but are not limited to, Police and Fire departments, good roads and street lights, public transportation, national defense etc. The 9 hours a week I give is my responsibility to society for all of the benefits I receive in return.

Since people who receive welfare are not able to pay taxes it stands to reason that they should give back some of their time to society in another way. I propose that way to be a community service requirement.
A community service requirement benefits everyone! Community service could include,

•  Neighborhood beautification (Planting flowers, cleaning vacant lots, scrubbing graffiti) 
• Working at charitable community organizations (food banks, big brother big sister, a local church, school, or library) 
• Directly working for the community, (unpaid local government positions, neighborhood watches or volunteer fire departments, cross walk guards).     

All of these activities would have immediate and long lasting benefits to the welfare recipients community.

Community service also benefits the person receiving welfare. By preforming community service these people will gain respect from the community they live in and are giving back to. It will transform those people from valueless takers to valuable contributors. It would eliminate the stigma associated with welfare in general. The community service requirement also gives people the opportunity to work. By volunteering they can build resumes meet other people, develope contacts and perhaps even turn their community service into a paying job. It gives them control and direction and offers opportunities at a time in their lives when they need it most.

 A community service requirement would reduce abuse. It would reduce abuse by attaching strings to what is now essentially free money. Those people in the system, a minority, who through fraud and abuse receive government assistance would lose the incentive to so since they would have to work for it.

Finally, it would blunt the people opposed to welfare by redefining the average welfare recipient. They could no longer tout "Welfare Queens" and lazy leeches looting hard working Americans. They would be forced to acknowledge that these Americans, despite financial hardship, are giving back their fair share to society. And once entrenched politicians would be hard pressed to cut funding to programs that not only benefit the 47% but the other 53% as well.

Rolling In Their Graves

I often wonder, being a student of history, what our fore fathers would say about the current state of the world. What would they say about us the American people?
Well I think that I could confidently state that Washington would be horrified by the polarization of our country via party politics. Washington would probably also be one of the biggest critics of our forgein policy. Not because he was adverse to violence but because he despised "entangling alliances" and interfereing in the affairs of other nations.
What about Jefferson? Well as for him he'd sob over the state of the all but extinct yeoman farmer. We know them as the honest Americans who used to make an honest living feeding the country until gigantic faceless corporations forced them into bankruptcy and co-opted there image to maintain billions of dollars in subsidies.
Benjamin Franklin would take a personal interest in the state of the media because in his day we had more independent news papers per person than we do today. By independent I mean not owned by Clear Channel, Time Warner or Rupert Murdoch.
Patrick Henry who famously said "give me liberty or give me death". Had he been living today he might have said, "please don't let them hurt me here take my liberty if it will protect me." 
John Adams the puritan, a man who prided not only himself but his countrymen on there work ethic. Would he be proud of the fact that most of our economy is based on making money out of money?
The list can go on almost indefinitely. The point I am trying to make is that we are a unique country founded on ideals of equality and justice. Those ideals have been warped, no longer do we enshrine those things that our founding fathers fought for like the bill of rights and the constitution. (How many people do you know that can recite the first 10?) Instead we enshrine our flag and our anthem the pomp the circumstance and the fluff. If our Founding Fathers are in fact looking down at us, they deserve better than to watch the country they gave there lives to disintegrate.

Why We Hate Them

3 days ago an extremist group, affiliated with or influenced by Al Qaeda, attacked our embassy in Benghazi Libya. In this attack, our ambassador and three other US personnel were murdered. Countless other innocent people were injured. While heinous and inexcusable, the actions of these men are entirely explainable, and were to a large degree preventable.

If you expect me to indulge in the republican talking point which claims that this attack could have been prevented if only we were more aggressive and diligent in our military/espionage operations, you are wrong.

If you believe I will indulge in the liberal talking point that this attack could be explained by pointing to a film that was created and shown portraying Allah in an undignified light, you too are also wrong

In fact almost every argument I have heard regarding this incident had been at the very least insulting, and at most dangerous. The only common thread I hear amidst the punditry is that these people must hate America.
Pardon my vulgarity, but "NO SHIT SHERLOCK!" The question no one seems sure of the answer to is "WHY?"

Lets knock a few "reasons" out of the running, shall we?

It's not because we are Free. We have been free for almost 250 years. Tell me if I am wrong, but I don't think the Persians ever lodged a formal complaint against Lincoln

It's not because we are Rich. If it was wealth they hated, they have plenty of oil rich targets much closer to home.

Its not because of religion, as convenient an excuse as that is. There are many examples throughout history which show Muslims, Christians and Jews living and prospering side by side; New York City, for example, has the largest Jewish and Muslim populations in America. Trust me: there is no holy war going on between the Kosher deli and the Falafal place down the block.

Now I bet you are scratching your heads at this point. "But Josh, If its not Freedom, Wealth or religion what can it possibly be? "

To answer your question I will pose a hypothetical situation and ask my own question at the end. (Feel free to answer in the comment section!)

The Year is 2050. America, bankrupt and struggling, is having trouble maintaining peace and stability in neighboring Mexico. Mexico has been embroiled in a bloody civil war between the drug lords and the government. The humanitarian situation has been compounded by the fact that in its economic desperation the United States has begun forcibly deporting its entire illegal population, most of which came across the Mexican border. On top of the suffering of these dispossessed people, Mexico's vast oil reserves are in danger and the global price of oil has skyrocketed.

In response to this crisis, China--along with a a coalition of other mostly Asian nations--decides to restore order, end the civil war and install a stable government which will insure a friendly environment for coalition resource development. Within a matter of months, Mexico (which for over three centuries had been firmly in the American sphere of influence) now has 500,000 Chinese troops in it with a sizable amount of them based on the U.S. Mexico border in order to prevent continued forcible deportations and any U.S. interference.

Fast forward a few decades. China has firmly established itself in Mexico and to a large degree Central America. While they have not yet interfered in U.S. politics yet, an opportunity arises.

The Hispanic peoples of the South Western United States (those who were not deported) want to rejoin their mother country Mexico. The Hispanic population begins to make overtures to the Mexican government, which relays their desires to Beijing. Unwilling to risk outright war with the United States, China begins to funnel aid, arms and intelligence through its client states in Central America in order to aid the rebels in the United States.

In the United States, it is becoming increasingly clear that China is assisting the Hispanic movement, but the United Stated is also unwilling and most likely unable to risk general war. They agree to a brokered division, eventually losing most of the South Western United States. This leaves a sizable minority of Native Caucasian Americans within the newly enlarged Mexico.

Having lost a sizable chunk of its territory, the United States economy begins to collapse. China, now firmly in the driver's seat, decided to leverage the United States further by using it's massive holding of United States Treasury Bills. Already defeated in spirit and financially bankrupt, the leading politicians see the writing on the wall. In an attempt to save their own skins (and perhaps fortunes) they accede to Chinese economic demands which include massive spending cuts, elimination of government programs, tax increases and the slashing of the military budget.

The American people, unwilling to lose their sovereignty to the Chinese, have become angry and radicalized. Some even form militias, hoarding food and weapons, and talk about attacks against the Chinese. Soon a militia group strikes. It's main target: a private compound in Oahu owned and occupied by Chinese Nationals. Despite American assurances that it was merely a rouge group, the Chinese people are outraged. In response, a naval flotilla and occupation force gets set to the Hawaiian Islands with the mission to protect Chinese citizens in the territory.

The American people become incensed at this direct infringement of American sovereignty and territory. Seeing that the government is incapable to do anything about it but launch an official protest, Americans begin to develop a deep hatred for China, the Chinese and all things Asian. The most radical amongst them declare a war of civilizations. They refuse to rest until the Western Hemisphere is rid of all Asian interference, The American South West is restored and the the United States and Hawaii are vacated by the Imperial Chinese Barbarians. With Chants of "Remember Pearl Harbor," the violence begins.

The Chinese meanwhile are oblivious as to why the Americans hate them so much. According to what they learned in history class, China did not invade Mexico but liberated it from its systemic violence and gave it order, peace and prosperity. Chinese troops risked their lives to end a humanitarian crisis which was only made worse by the selfish Americans.

When the Southwest United States wanted to leave the Union and join Mexico, China was only helping an oppressed minority rejoin the people and country they belonged to. When China came and demanded economic reform, they were merely assisting an impoverished nation by alleviating some of their debt and showing them how to get back on the road to fiscal responsibility. When these ungrateful Americans attacked a Chinese compound, China behave calmly and civilized only sending a small military force in order to protect its citizens and its interests. And when the Americans rose up, it was because of racial hatred and jealousy.

All the while the average Chinese person is convinced through years of schooling and media propaganda that it is Americans who harbor irrational hatred for their culture and way of life.

My Question: Can you tell me why these Americans hate the Chinese?

Reclaiming the Republic

"Reclaiming the Republic." Show of hands: are you aware of the concept of separation of powers and/or the three branches of government? If you raised your hand, congratulations: you have been thoroughly misled for most likely your entire academic life. This is nothing to be ashamed of, since most people understand these concepts as a triangle consisting of the Congress, Presidency and the Supreme Court; this is understandable given the standard American History lesson most are taught in grade school. In reality, however, the Founding Fathers had a different diagram in mind. Their "triangle" consisted of: the People, the States and the federal government. With the powers of the federal government clearly defined, they devised a system designed to ensure that the federal government was kept in check. The most basic being the 9th and 10th amendments. These amendments state: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Also: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Combined with the nineteen enumerated powers of Congress, these guidelines were intended to be clear and unmistakable proof of the Founding Fathers' intent to limit the federal government. Along with those amendments to the Constitution, they designed within the constitution a government to protect the sovereignty of both the people and the states. They protected the rights of the people in two ways: First they ensured that all monetary bills would have to be introduced and passed by the house of representatives. Second, they made the state supreme in all matters of government, minus defense and foreign policy. By making states and their respective governments responsible, the Constitution and the Founding Fathers anticipated the greatest power going to those who are most directly responsible to the individual citizen. They protected the supremacy of the states by giving them a voice in the federal government. Prior to 1913 the Senate was chosen by the State Legislator of the various states. By changing this the states were knocked out of the checks-and-balances triangle, thus redefining the relationship between the federal government and the states. No longer were the Senators beholden to the States' interests; instead, they were part of the federal government branch. It is no surprise that the federal government only expanded as rapidly as it did AFTER 1913 since the prior check had been dismantled. If we restore the Founders vision of a Federal Republic of United States, it is the people who will benefit. I say give the power back to the people who most directly represent us instead of giving it to people who in some states represent 10-20 million.

Hello everyone. This blog is my attempt to enter the enormous discussion we as a nation are having about the size and scope of the federal government and the role that it should play in our everyday lives. I entitled the blog "The 21st Amendment" for a few reasons:
First, it is the only Amendment that has specifically repealed another (The 18th otherwise known as Prohibition), thus reducing the power and role of the Federal Government.
Second, to remind people that the Federal Government is not always right or perfect.
Third because I will most likely be following Ernest Hemingway's advice "write drunk edit sober."

I am sure that I will be promoting ideas that a great many of you disagree with. While I encourage lively debate and a free exchange of ideas I implore all readers and those who chose to comment to remain respectful and open minded.

That being said I fully expect and encourage those of you who do chose to read and comment to constantly challenge me and call me out if I have misrepresented any facts, quotes or opinions of others. "To err is human" and I expect that I might from time to time.

Thank you for reading this far. My first post will be entitled "Reclaiming the Republic" and will include Ideas and Methods that I feel are essential to restoring our country.

Sincerely,
Josh