So good old B. O. believes that we should somehow check with 'other countries' before we decide how much we'll eat, what kind of car we'll drive or where we set our home thermostats.
He thinks it's unfair that we consume 25% of the world's energy when we are only 3% of the populace.
Does this mean that B. O. will be satisfied if we reduce our energy consumption to 3% of the worlds', in order to be fair?
Seems so. And that, of course, means (in the fair world of B. O.) we will use roughly 85% less energy than we do now.
This is the end, my friend. This kind of change means catastrophic collapse of the world's economy, not just ours.
And even if he denies that a 'fair' match between energy consumption and population share is what he had in mind (if not, why bring it up?), we are still faced with a putative leader who wishes to check with France, Russia and Iran every time we order a Big Mac or give the thermostat a nudge on a hot day or buy a used car.
Rules, restrictions, chains, prisons, slavery. Call it what you will, it's the end of American national sovereignty and personal freedom.
"but Dave, we should conserve and use wisely and be good stewards!" Agreed. We should volunteer to make changes in our own lives that suit the times. It's only right.
But when it's mandatory, and when it's at the demand of OTHER COUNTRIES, it's no longer liberty, no longer America.
Imagine the HOUSING CRISIS that would erupt if the European Union was allowed to legislate how big the typical American house should be! Half the houses in the nation would plummet to ZERO value! Banks would collapse, business would close by the thousands, jobs lost by the millions, unemployment and welfare benefits rocketing far beyond the taxpayers' ability to fund them!
"But monsieur, it is simply unfair zat you should have such a big house and such high energy consumption when zere are starving people in Ethiopia!"
You are free, sir, to have that opinion. I am free to dispute it, as I can't imagine what my living in a smaller house would do for an Ethiopian. But once you enslave me with legislation that removes my right to make such decisions for myself, the value of the house I presently own will drop to zero. Forbidden. Too big. Against ze international law.
Unwilling to make payments for a worthless property, I will then default on my mortgage, along with the millions of people whose houses are bigger than mine, and banks will fail, Home Depot and lighting stores and flooring firms and Sherwin Williams and innumerable other companies will close their stores nationwide, and every lawn mowing illegal in Texas will have to go home to Mexico to find a job.
Of course, rather than make a larger home illegal, they could just impose punitive Euro-style taxes on them. This wouldn't necessarily drop their value to zero, but it would darn sure depress it big time. Nobody wants to buy an obligation to pay stupidly higher taxes. We've already seen depressed areas all over America caused solely by rapid and large increases in property tax.
And as the value drops, more defaults, more credit crises, more lost Home Depot jobs, more Mexicans going south to cut their OWN lawns.
Every small and medium business in the neighbourhoods of larger homes will eventually be hit as values plummet and people move out; jobs lost there, stores closed, restaurants starved for business. More jobs lost means more benefits claimed, higher taxes needed to pay for them, and with the tax increase even fewer profits for business, even more closed stores, even more lost jobs, and the cycle continues.
this is B. O.'s vision for America.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment