Sorry People, But You Have No “Right” To Other People’s Money!

by lewwaters

As we near the end of the 4th year of the “Great Recession,” seeing the national debt skyrocket and 9% unemployment nationwide being billed as the “new norm,” we once again see Governor Gregoire calling for more tax increases and of course, budget cuts.

We saw her recommend and the legislature pass some pretty deep cuts last year, but now see and hear they didn’t do much good; they didn’t help our ongoing struggles in this deeply recessed economy.

We all know that it is government spending that is the real problem and not the lack of revenue so much, as Democrats always claim in their desire to rape the taxpayers’ wallet even more, but what of those “deep obscene cuts” from last year? Why didn’t they help out as expected?

Asking myself that question, the answer seemed to come from a November 19, 2011 Seattle Times article, As state makes cuts, lawsuits are flying.

From public unions to illegal aliens, all used to being handed our money in entitlement programs, when the legislature made needed cuts to get the overspending under control, each found some slip and fall attorney to go before an activist judge to overturn cuts made by the legislature as we have demanded. We read:

“This month, a Thurston County judge overruled state plans to limit Medicaid clients’ nonemergency visits to emergency rooms, a decision that could cost the state $32 million between now and June 2013.
In October, a federal judge said the state could not kick 11,000 people off a subsidized insurance program because of their immigration status. That allows thousands to re-enroll at a projected cost of $17 million.
And in March, a federal judge ruled the state also could not reduce food assistance to people because of their immigration status. Potential cost: $16.5 million.
Overall, the state has been sued more than a dozen times because of cuts lawmakers made in recent years to curtail state spending and balance the budget.
“Everyone who gets cut off benefits is going to sue,” said House Ways and Means Chairman Ross Hunter, D-Medina. “What we’re doing in the budget now is like full employment for lawyers.”

And of course, we cannot forget how unions and Democrats fight nearly every single budget reform measure put forth and voted in by the people.

As entitlement programs were greatly expanded, with no consideration given to cyclical economic downturns, people have gotten used to receiving our tax dollars and apparently believe they are now owed our tax dollars as a “right.”

Through activist judges, the teachers union in Washington State sees some 70% of our state budget, much of it destined for education as ‘off-limits’ to budget cuts. Students are doing no better and tuition is increasing in higher education, but teachers and administrators paychecks are well protected, having seen minimal cuts if any.

And amazingly our governor is now proposing what she calls a “temporary” sales tax increase with much of it slated to go back into education!

The most indicative comment of why we remain deep in recession comes from an SEIU spokesman, Adam Glickman who says,

“The courts have been used throughout history to advocate for the rights of vulnerable populations, whether it’s civil rights or the rights of people with disabilities. Government can’t take away people’s rights just because they don’t want to raise revenue.”

In what is probably one of the most arrogant statements I’ve heard from a union, Glickman adds,

“So if states don’t want to be sued for violating people’s rights, then they should stop violating people’s rights and instead raise revenue so that they don’t have to do that.”

Let’s set a few things straight. First, no one has a “right” to someone else’s money! None, nada, zip.

I don’t care if you are handicapped, injured on the job, poor as a church mouse or what race you might be, you do not have a “right” to receive someone else’s money!

Social programs to help these people are not a “right,” but are a privilege. A privilege that has been abused by far too many for far too long. An abused privilege that has effectively stolen available funds from those who truly deserve and need help.

We do not have a “right” to a job, a paycheck or employer benefits. Those too are privileges extended from the employer and that you may receive provided you perform your job adequately so long as you remain employed.

Second, unions, especially public unions do not have a “right” to collective bargain with the very politicians they donate campaign funds to in order to elect favorable people who will grant the unions ever increasing wages and benefits.

Collective bargaining too is a privilege that has long been abused and taken for granted as we see public unions continually balk at making minor sacrifices along with the rest of us in these severe times.

Even Franklin Delano Roosevelt, considered the father or modern socialism cautioned on public unions in 1937 when he wrote in part,

“All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress.”

FDR did not speak of finding an activist judge to overrule the will of millions of taxpaying citizens.

Indicating the severity of the sue happy attitude displayed by the Service Employees International Union spokesman, Governor Gregoire also informs us that her staff attorney now sits in on the budget meetings.

Third, raising taxes beyond a reasonable level hurts everybody, primarily the middle class. Taxes placed upon the wealthy business owners increases their cost of business which must either be passed along or employees cut to continue to be profitable.

In the case of public unions, we taxpayers take it on the chin as more and more taxes and fees are raised to pay the greedy union bosses.

So long as this particular segment of our society feels they are owed other people’s money as a “right,” we continue to flounder economically, spending our way into economic collapse.

As Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher so famously said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

That’s other people’s money that you have no right to in the first place.

12 Comments to “Sorry People, But You Have No “Right” To Other People’s Money!”

  1. Again Lew, the only thing that is going to stop this out-of-control, tyrannical government is a bloody revolution. A revolution will thin out the gene pool and get rid of a whole bunch of the mindless “Dancing With The Stars” crowd who keeps voting in the Liberal pukes.


  2. Whose money?!

    I agree it’s other people’s money and the Americans who do NOT pay back their “loan” money have no right to it. They claim it’s theirs, obviously having no understanding of how economics works, and no inclination to learn. (Miserably, a lot of the smart ones DO KNOW and they’re taking all of us for a ride.)

    I’m not supporting the Marxist position that it’s everybody’s money – I’m saying that only the “loan” part MUST be paid back!

    And, yes, there will be a revolution.


  3. Martin, feel free to send me a portion of your money at any time. 😉

    Seriously, as I have said before, what you have is yours and I am not entitled to a dime of it. Your worked and earned it just as others did.

    That anyone would think you owe them something because they did not work as hard and demand you pay their way, through taxes or whatever, should anger you.

    What you contribute to charity is also your business, but it isn’t because you owe anybody.

    If you hire people, it is not because you owe them a job, but because you see a need to expand your business and are willing to pay someone for services received. But, you do not owe anybody a job if you decide not to expand or use your money as you see fit.


  4. Lew, I’ll ask you a simple question: If you lived by yourself on a desert island, would money mean anything? Would whatever work you did (picking coconuts) have any value?

    Money only has value because society (Government) says it does. It only circulates because society (Government) makes it circulate. Modern society runs because of Government economics. “Taxes” are simply the feedback for this exquisite system.

    I’ll support your argument that some people take advantage of the system. As a Conservative you are really concerned about the “loafers.” As a LIberal, I’m really concerned about the “exploiters.” If we could settle on the fundamentals of the economics, then we could do something about both groups of abusers.


  5. Your “premise” is all screwed-up, Martin. Money is only a medium of exchange. The government can only create a name for the “units” of money, but cannot “set” the “value” of money. The markets do that.

    Money circulates because it is constantly “used” as a medium of exchange, not because the government “circulates” it.

    Government doesn’t make anything “run”, government only gets in the way of things “running”.

    You must have had a really weird “economics” class.


  6. Jack, I often hear Conservatives say, “government gets in the way of things running.” …?

    So, if there was no Government (Libertarianism), the world would be a better place? Dude – there’s nothing between you and anarchy except Government. The modern world is only a couple hundred years old because modern Government only evolved recently… (Unless you think slavery, exploitation of women, brutality, and dying of Chicken pox is the ideal state of human affairs.)


  7. Congratulations to Martin Hash (I sincerely mean that) for finding his mojo this year and finally taking pride in his role as Lew Water’s ankle-biter.

    Hey, good for you Martin! I’ve said all along: Embrace your inner Hound. Who says this label has to be a pejorative? Stand up Martin! Proclaim, “Damn right, I’m a Hound of Whinerville, and here’s why Lew Waters!”

    I just hope you’ll use the correct preposition. It’s “of,” and not “from” Whinerville. Rolls off the tongue more easily.


  8. Oh, heck, Molly, are you flirting with me?


  9. Martin, you’re trying to portray Conservativism as a “zero-sum game” and it doesn’t work. Conservatives feel that a little bit of government is “necessary”, but not the big, bloated, pig government that we have now.


  10. Martin, John’s job is titillate the local discourse, both negative and positive. Now if we simply just treated him like the small child he portrays in his newspaper columns, he would have no standing in the community anymore.

    Though if you feel justly to allow him to inflate power ego, be my guest. I’ll be in the other room with the real people trying to bring change here.

    And yes, John, it is rather easy to marginalize you into a small corner with a straight jacket, so you really cannot hurt any one else but your own person-hood.


  11. I think Martin likes Molly’s “attention”.


  12. Jack, are you paying THAT close of attention to Molly’s fantacisms? 🙂 I doubt Martin or anyone else is…..


Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: