Mortgaging Our Grandchildren's Future? That's Being Optimistic!
Monday, April 4, 2011 at 8:18PM The Government indoctrination camps (public schools) have really done their job to perfection. Vladimir Lenin, who knew as well as anyone how to "control the masses", stated:
"Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted."
He probably never dreamed of being able to indoctrinate children for 12 years or more as is the case in the western world today!
After 12 years of "education" most people today can barely read or write. And if they can, it is really one in a hundred that can actually think. What, really, do they "teach" kids in these school systems? It is mostly how to submit, fall into line, do as you are told and memorize a bunch of useless, and usually incorrect, things. They don't want people to be able to think... if they did they might question things!
What does anyone on the street in the US know about what money is? Or about the Federal Reserve System? Usually not much, by design... and if they know anything they almost assuredly didn't learn about it in the school system. This video I found on YouTube gives a good cross section about what average people know about the Federal Reserve system.
And because the system never teaches people the truth about their government they generally have no idea about its impending collapse.
I flipped by an American TV station the other day and heard a statement I've heard countless times. Some people, even including Barrack Obama seem to have some idea that the US Government is beyond bankrupt and the US dollar is headed to worthlessness. But they've got the timing all wrong. They always state, "We are mortgaging our children's/grandchildren's future!".
Unless you are 80 years old or above and your grandchildren are already in their 30s or 40s, that is being incredibly optimistic. All of the events that are happening today will have repercussions that are already being felt in the ongoing depression the US has been in since 2000 and will have even worse repercussions in the immediate future. Not 50 years from now... not 20... not even 10. Like, this year... or next!
If the US Government doesn't default on the great majority of its debt and obligations OR if the US dollar doesn't enter into quantitative easing led hyperinflation by 2015, it will be a miracle.
If you depend on the government itself for your information you are already lost. And listening to their "projections" is even more absurd.
As example, on page 25 of the US Government's Fiscal Year 2009 budget outlook they predicted that “if left unchanged, mandatory spending alone is projected to exceed total projected Government receipts in approximately 50 years.”
Ok, you might have thought, we still have about 50 years until the Government will have to default on its debt and obligations or until they have to hyperinflate the dollar just to pay for ongoing expenses.
Not so fast. The White House Office of Management and Budget now projects, just two years later, that in the current fiscal year (2011), mandatory spending alone will exceed all federal receipts.
They were only off by about 48 years. Whoops!
If you are reading this blog you are likely aware of the upcoming turmoil. However, if you believe you still have a few years left before you need to really prepare, you are taking a huge risk. This system is on the verge of collapse. It was always an inevitability, because it is a non-free market, centrally planned economic system based on ever increasing debts - but now it is not just an inevitability but directly ahead.
Nothing that is currently ongoing will "mortgage your children's or grandchildren's future". The United States will cease to exist in its current form in the coming months. If anything, and with some luck, your grandchildren will only vaguely recall the Great Collapse of 2013 which they will hopefully hear about from a history podcast in a non-government run school in a stateless, free society at some point years from now.
Don't worry about your grandchildren, worry about yourself. Your future grandchildren will be one of the last things on your mind if you are one of the millions who get caught unaware by the coming collapse and end up losing everything.
To find out how to prepare for the coming dollar collapse, subscribe to The Dollar Vigilante today - it just might be the best money you've ever spent
Reader Comments (2)
Jeff, Jung (the Swiss psychiatrist) used the term "enantiodromia" to describe the psychological principle of "running into opposites." Historically, no people have ever been more opposed to centrally-planned, non-free-market economies than the citizens of the US. That, of course, has changed, and it is perhaps instructive to analyze why. The healthcare system is one example. Layers of bureaucracy and regulation to PREVENT government-provided healthcare have made the quasi-free market health-insurance-encumbered US health system perhaps the most expensive in the world. Like it or lump it, but government-run healthcare in Canada costs half as much, and for most people, it is also better. Somewhere, the idea that the government and the Fed have the "responsibility" to rescue an economy in trouble became acceptable (our forefathers would not have accepted that idea for a moment), and the executives on Wall Street have been feeding at the publicly mis-regulated "private" trough for decades, making Animal Farm no longer an allegory (the pigs are running the farmyard). A guy I respect (Bill Fleckenstein) says that the Fed has more implicit responsibility for this situation than any other body, including the big spenders in Washington and the over-leveraged risk-takers and game-players on Wall Street. That is, easy money creates a climate in which elected representatives, business leaders, et al, simply believe they will be rescued. And of course the public buys into this idea. Who in Wisconsin is in the streets, saying, "Hey, thanks for saving us taxpayers the money we can't afford to pay!" Anyway, the greatest opponents of the centrally-planned economy have now morphed into its greatest advocates. Enantiodromia - the word of the day.....
Laurence I disagree with your comment that the Canadian healthcare system costs half as much.
First we need to recognize the difference. In Canada we have a state monopoly in the provision of healthcare (though not in the provision of essential goods to the healthcare monopoly).
In America we have had increasing state intervention into the healthcare industry starting with the AMA who in 1904 limited the number of doctors entering the field and closed down a bunch of schools. This was done in the name of protecting the consumer, but in reality the doctors got together and did it to raise their incomes.
They essentially created a labor monopoly within a private system. [Just to deviate for a moment this is typical -in Canada the state likes to control the industry; in the US monopoly power is doled out by the state but usually vests in private hands -so up here you have state monopolies and crown corporations while down there you have antitrust and cronyism...or "state capitalism" (or corporatism) -in Russia you have oligarchs].
Progressively, over the years, the US government eventually forced employers to contribute, then granted the power of licensing to the states, and began to underwrite (subsidize) healthcare demand a few decades ago.
Economics teaches us that when you restrict supply and subsidize demand you will get shortages and higher prices - and that's even before we throw the Fed into the mix. The so called free market medical system in the US has been progressively sabotaged over the past century. The universal coverage is just a final straw.
So the high price of healthcare has nothing to do with it being relatively more private in the US than in Canada -in fact economics teaches us also that prices would fall if the industry were free from government. So make sure to put the blame for the high cost where it belongs. On government regulation and subsidy, as usual.
As for Canada's healthcare system costing half as much, I'm not sure where you are getting those facts, but undoubtedly they do not account for the lower quality of healthcare and the greater shortages we get here.
As the US system is more socialized you will find that our healthcare costs not only start to rise more, but also, their quality/availability will fall. Like it or not Canada has been a big beneficiary of the innovations of the relatively freer market down south in this industry. I can attest to that personally. If you slow down those innovations, because, say, the system is totally socialized, then our state monopoly system will suffer as well.
That is, costs will rise and quality will fall.
The soviets were the first to try out universal healthcare.
As one of Gorbachev's economists pointed out in the article at the link here,
http://mises.org/daily/3650
...the system deteriorated to the point a black market developed out of the bribery required to get something done -outside of which the doctors would quip that their patients pretend to pay them while they pretended to help them. And if you were sick, they pushed you out the door so that the hospital wouldn't look bad.
The only reason this hasn't happened in countries like Canada that have adopted a similar system is that the rest of the economy here is not centrally planned. Thankfully, there is a relatively free market in the goods that supply the healthcare provider monopoly. And the state is loosening its grip on some provisions lately.
But the main point is that it is a matter of economic law that a private system in healthcare would result in lower prices and better quality. After all, all we want is to allow competition. It's a ridiculous argument to say that we are better off because our government restricts competition. Effectively, that is what our system is.
Thanks for your comments.
Cheers!
Ed Bugos