I have had several blog posts about Immigration, and as most of you who read them can tell, I don’t trust the government and want them to prove enforcement before I will move any further in the process. No amnesty or guest worker programs until AFTER the wall is built and AFTER we fine companies who hire illegals.

The other day though, I was listening to an economic issues show on TV and I heard something that made me reconsider my position.

The speaker noted that problem is that due to government action and inaction, we are where we are. We have 15-20 million illegals employed in the country harvesting crops, cutting meat, and doing other important work and unimportant work. I will not accept as others say that these jobs are ones Americans won’t do. Currently though, these are jobs that they are not doing.

The problem lies in the answer to the question “What would happen if all of the illegals were forced to leave?” The gardeners and pool cleaners would not have much impact and the drug dealers and gang members would be a net positive. But what happens when there are suddenly 8-12 million entry level jobs in the food and manufacturing industries? I know that many of you say “who cares”, but lets walk into it a bit.

The first impact would be a lot of harvesting that would not get done. For at least a year or two (until mechanization and other labor sources came in to play), crops would rot in the fields and products would not be made. This would result in immediate massive inflation in food (mainly) but also in some manufactured goods. At the same time, many farmers and small businesses would fail while they try to replace their labor. To hire new people, wages would soar, pulling labor from other industries and raising prices. Finally, as the prices rise and the supply shrinks, it will become more effective to purchase the products off shore. And once the markets have gone off shore, it will become harder to get them to come home again. This will result in permanently shuttered plants and shrinking domestic farms. In short, a national recession (at least) would be the immediate result.

I still don’t trust the politicos. I think they will lie to me and con me in so many ways. I still want them to prove to me that they really mean it this time. But…. I am no longer sure I have the right answer to this problem.

Anyone care to help me?

In several blog posts, I have read issues and ideas about national health care. Some people prefer a single payer system while some suggest that we require medical insurance for all and provide it for the poor. HillaryCare was planning to make doctors employees. While this seems fine, all of these have holes in them large enough to drive a truck through.

We do have a wonderful example of doctors as employees in our own country. If you have ever belonged to the military, you have had this type of “free health care”. I had it for 8 years and enjoyed the use of uninterested, overworked, and arrogant doctors. Much work was pushed off to technicians. The results were that I had a friend who was told she needed a hysterectomy due to pain in her abdomen. She went to a private doctor who gave her the medicine to clear up her yeast infection. A dentist was given a court martial when it was discovered that he was prescribing root canals to all of his patients to get practice. I went in to a doctor and showed positive to the TB test. I explained that I had shown positive since I was 13 and other tests showed no TB. She insisted that I be given the entire 9 month treatment (with it’s risk of severe liver damage) just in case. I am sure that anyone can add to these horror stories. For one more, consider the scandal at Walter Reid Hospital.

There are a couple of economic facts that are always ignored in these discussions. These are: The motivation of the doctor, the economics of insurance, and the law of supply and demand.

It is an accepted fact that each person acts to maximize his income. Under the current private payer system, a doctor can increase his fees if he is expert. This reduces his work load so that he can spend more time with his patients and provide better care. When an HMO or rate control plan such as National Health is in place, the only strategy that the doctor has is to maximize the number of patients seen. This results in cursory examinations and poor treatment. Finally, under a plan where the doctor is an employee, the strategy is to fill out the paperwork properly in order to be promoted to management and the health of the patient can be ignored. The final strategy in all of these cases is to leave the country for one with open care or to change professions to one with better payout.

A fallacy exists that insurance somehow generates money. The concept of insurance is one of spreading the cost over a large group assuming that only part of the group will incur the injury. No money is added, but since not everyone has a car wreck every month, the premiums for the thousands who do not wreck pay for the ones who do. The insurance plans discussed cover routine care and maintenance medicines. In this case, each insured is likely to use that portion of the benefit. This means that we take our money, give it to the insurance company from which they take their profit and expenses. They then turn around and give it to the doctors. It would be better to simply give it to the doctors directly and remove the profit and expense of the insurance company.

Simply, supply and demand says that if you have a limited resource and a limited amount of money available, there will become an equilibrium at a price where those two constraints meet. If you add demand or money to the system, the price will rise. If you add resources, the price will drop. Therefore, if the government adds cash to medical services, more service does not magically appear. Instead, the price charged rises. All of these plans are driven by adding money to the health system. And people wonder why medical costs soar? In addition, by giving free medical services to all, the demand will rise as well, once again pushing up prices.

Health care is important, there is no doubt. However, nothing that exists can be free. As the saying goes, “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”. Someone pays and then the market system goes into action. We may think it is not fair that some people die earlier than others. But that is life. And please don’t think that will change ever. Some people will die by accident, by early disease, or other causes. And medical insurance cannot help that. Of course, we will also all die some day. At least everyone has so far.

One last point. Currently, the nationalized systems are cracking around the world and they are beginning to get private options on top of the public ones. The economic rule there will indicate that the good doctors will move to private care where they can spend more time and more resources on those patients. The end result will be that the poor get worse care and die younger than the rich. Is this surprising to anyone?

In my previous discussions, I have spoken about the decay and dissolution of the things that have made our nation grow to it’s current prominence in world affairs, in science, and in the arts. In this post, I will attempt to explore the whys and wherefores of national growth or decay.

It seems to me that the first impulse of men and governments is toward stability and control. Instability makes power tenuous and generates fear in the corridors of power as well as in the homes of men. Bureaucracy was invented to allow an organization to minimize the instability and unpredictability of people. When people act out of their personal desires and needs rather than following the orders of government, who knows what the result will be? This is totally against the interest of your rulers.

The natural force that opposes the bureaucratic impulse can be called self-reliance, individualism, or many other things. It is mainly driven by an outward directed cause, a religion, family prosperity, or other objectives. It cannot be a simple desire, but rather needs to be a burning need to go and do. Growing nations, growing companies, and growing religions have this kind of fire. In failing, decaying organizations, this faith is either lost, soft, or directed inward. An example of this force is evangelicalism versus Zen. An evangelical will push outward to spread the news and gain new adherents. He believes it is the commandment of g*d to bring in others. A Zen master would rather look inward to his soul. Neither are necessarily good or bad, but the first drives expansion while the second, being self centered, gradually will die along with its believers.

America has had 2 examples of this force that have generated our rise. First has been the egalitarian philosophy that says the garbage man is as good as the President. How many times have you heard “anyone could grow up to be President”? This drives the ambitious to take risks to rise in society, to accumulate power and money, in other words, to succeed. It also drove our settlers out to conquer the wilderness and to build lives for themselves free of the constraints of the settled lands. They knew that if left alone they could create a good home, and in many cases, become wealthy and powerful.

A second driver is that of religion. As a strongly religious Christian nation, we have felt the evangelical responsibility to fight evil, to spread the “truth”, and to tame the barbarians. This last was the same force that drove the Roman Empire and the British Empires to their heights.

Unfortunately, as indicated before, both of these oppose the bureaucracy. How can I control the nation (for it’s own good) if you demand to think for yourself? How can I stabilize things when you insist on inventing new things, opening new frontiers, or refusing my totally reasonable (to me) rules?

In the early years, communications were not sufficient for the political powers to control the outward forces. When a message from Washington got to Nevada in weeks and could easily been ignored, people made their own rules. Now, with instant communication and few available frontiers to escape to (even if we want), the political forces have the ability to work their will. And boy, have they done just that.

Lets look at the major initiatives occurring in our nation? The first is the creation of the political and social elites. Consider Bush 1, Bush 2 and now the possibility of Clinton 1 and 2. Consider JFK, RFK, and the Kennedy clan. Consider the power families of Hollywood. Yes, you can gain power and join them, but it is becoming less and less easy. There are a number of studies about the growing gap between the millionaires and the normal Americans and the loss of a true middle class. And, as an example of what to expect, consider the recent Immigration bill. Rejected by a vast majority of common people but supported by most of the elite.

One of the only remaining frontiers is the internet, and what is happening there? Consideration of “fairness” doctrines, talk of taxing, law suits on what is said, attempts at control, complaints about us bloggers not being “fair” or “accurate” when we report stories that the elite does not want told. Consider McCain Feingold. Enough said.

Invention too is being stifled. Laws and lawsuits about new inventions causing harm. Huge barriers exist to creation of new drugs and new products unless those products are seen as harmless. Existing companies are protecting their turf rather than feeding the growth of new ideas. Even Global Warming falls here as we attempt to put controls on manufacture, use of tools, and growth of industry. Stability requires no growth, control requires fewer but larger organizations or incorporation into the government (Hillary Care anyone?) Also, look at corporate consolidation. A few big companies are easier to control than millions of tiny ones.

The causes too are being attacked. Much has been written of the war on Christianity. But there is also a war on patriotism, and the other outward driving causes. Who are we to tell the world… America is the biggest danger to the world… Come home and let the other nations be… Military people are evil, who needs them (they will only go out to fight after all).

The causes that are supported are inward looking. Let ME abort my child. Let ME marry a person of my own sex. This leads to a shrinking population (which we are told is good) as well as again a focus on me and not the community. Ecology is all about stopping us from using resources (wasting them or using them up) and is an inherently limiting philosophy. Even immigration is here. If people are balkanized into small, powerless groups, they do not have the power to reject the bureaucracy.

The final method of control and stabilization is to replace self reliance with reliance on government. If I give you your retirement, your medical care, your incomes, your homes, your … You have no reason to go out and strive. Yes, you may not become elite, but you will be comfortable. Families are not needed because we support single people. After all, families are a cause that generates desires for growth.

Currently, we are losing this battle. The elites (in all parties) are winning. Each speaks to their own body politic, but each governs in the same way. Primaries and elections are structured so that only elites can win with speech controls, high cost (only rich can make enough to win), and complicit media.

What can be done? Only a cause that awakens the sleeping vox populi will change these things. And that cause will generate a second American Revolution. It may be one of ballots and an attentive electorate. It may be one driven by a charismatic leader who commits to break the cycle. Or, it may be one of bullets and bombs and death.

If this does not happen, we will have a peaceful, stagnant, declining nation with the reigns of power in the hands of the elite and the great unwashed masses happy as sheep in their lot.

God Save the USA.

I have just watched "The Dirty Dozen" for the gazillionth time.  They were doing the 40th anniversary of the original release on AMC.  Thinking about it, and thinking about my previous post On My Honor For God And My Country, I once again saw the change in our society in the past 40 years.

The whole premise of the movie is that you would have people who were totally amoral criminals who would prefer to die as men than to live in jail.  They came together as a team, risked their lives and lost them as a matter of pride and self worth.  But how could that be the case then an so much not the case now?

I feel that this question is a key one that will determine our future as a nation and a people.  That is because if all you care about is now and your life and comfort, you will never take risks to be great.  You will never risk your life for others or for an impersonal ideal.  And if no one will risk themselves or their comfort for their families, their communities, or their nation, the first committed group that comes along will utterly defeat and destroy us.

On my last post, Mgraves noted that it was childishness that causes the issues.  As he wrote, "The individualism of today is self-centered and blind to honor and the larger picture."  And I think that this is right as far as it goes, but it does not go to the core of the matter.  To me, the main issue is larger and different from that.  To me, there are two interlocking issues that drive this loss.  First is the loss of belief in something spiritual that is larger than us.  It could be simply the trope of manhood and what a man should do.  It could be G*d and the belief in an afterlife.  It could even be Noblesse Oblige.  But regardless, it is a belief system that transcends the temporal and the personal and extends to the public.

And what are we being taught in school, in society, on TV, in movies?  First that religion is a sop to the masses.  Only fools believe in the mythology of religion.  After all, science is god and G*d is dead.

Another thing we are being taught is that everyone is "special" and your life is the only thing you have.  Because of our "special" nature, we must not compete because we might lose.  We must not risk because failure would disprove that we are special.  And since there is no life after death, we certainly must not risk or sacrifice for others, because loss or death would end everything of value.

This is the reason that I fear the invasion from the south and the attack of the Muslim nations much more than I do Russia, China, or other similar threats.  The Hispanics prove every day that they are willing to sacrifice their lives and comfort for the comfort of those at home.  The Muslims kill themselves to bring about the victory of their religion.  While we run from any challenge, worry that if we kicked the hispanics out, we would lose some comfort (since we would have to mow our own lawns" or pay more for a hamburger or lettuce.

We do have many in our nation that do not ascribe to these beliefs.  They are called conservatives and they populate the police, the military, and vote based on national interest rather than self interest.  But every time they do, the press calls them fools and points at how stupid they are to do the things they do when there is no benefit in it to them.  Our soldiers are "wasted" in Iraq when they could be home with their wives and children.  Border control is a waste because the immigrants "do jobs Americans won't".

To me, there is only one way that we will ever succeed in turning the tide.  We conservatives must take back the media.  We must take back the schools.  We must teach the value of sacrifice and honor and duty to the next generation, and the one after that.  I think this is possible and doable.  We have money, position, and voting power.  People cry for a reason to belong and for something outside themselves.  This is why gangs flourish in inner cities as do cults.  People want something more than the hollow future of self.  If we give it, they will come as long as we don't chase them away with public scorn and "education" that rejects such values.