 
## America's To Do List

## Published by Stephen Green at Smashwords

## Copyright 2012 Stephen Green

##

Smashwords Edition, License Notes

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you're reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

##

## ~ ~ ~

##

## Dedication:

##

## This book is dedicated to anyone who chooses to think rather than be thought for.

Preface

Chapter 1 – Why America is the Best Country in the World

Geography

Democracy

The American People

Chapter 2 – Reform American Government

Institute the Political Aptitude Test

Eliminate the Imbalanced Power of the Major Political Parties

Create a more efficient elective procedure

Curtail Presidential Powers

Eliminate Presidential Re-election

Make Both Houses of Congress Accountable for Their Actions

Disband Outdated Government Positions

Chapter 3 – Refocus Collective Spending

Social Security

Transition Welfare to Workfare

Reduce Public Housing

Eliminate FEMA and other Federal Inefficiencies

Eliminate Bailouts, Stimulus, and Subsidies

Reform Detrimental Laws

Reconsider Minimum Wage

Legalize Marijuana

Prison Reform

Chapter 4 – Reform American Education

Eliminate the Public School Monoply

Eliminate the Teacher's Union

Curriculum Reform

Additional Curriculum Reform

Student and Parental Responsibility

Colleges and Universities

Reduce the Cost of Education

Increase the Value of Education

Chapter 5 – Institute Equal Protection

Politicians

Athletes and Celebrities

The Super Wealthy

Lawyers

Chapter 6 – American Accountability and Responsibility

Tattoos

Electronics

Clothes

Cars

Credit Cards

Economics of Personal Health

Squandering Time is a Prolific Personal Problem

Chapter 7 - Conclusion

## Preface

# "It was the cause of America that made me an author. The force with which it struck my mind, and the dangerous condition the country appeared to me in, by courting an impossible and unnatural reconciliation with those who were determined to reduce her, instead of striking out into the only line that could cement and save her, a DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE." Thomas Paine. Common Sense, P. 94

This book is a long delayed project that I began several years ago after touring America via the railroad. On my trip I saw the problems that many Americans were facing and I heard their specific complaints.

I wrote this book because I believe America is already on its way down the "Road to Serfdom," as Hayek predicted. What's worse is that I believe if we do not fix America's problems now, they will become too invasive to solve. We do not have much time left, perhaps 10 years, I believe far less. Our rights are dwindling, as are the percentage of Americans smart enough to protect those rights.

I have written this work in a concise and thought provoking manner so that as many people as possible can read it; and then help save America. Most people like to merely complain about problems, which is an inefficient waste of time, this book focuses on **solutions**. If you do not agree with the solutions that I have posited; do your own research and present your own solutions.

# "When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win but both of us will profit." Ayn Rand. Atlas Shrugged page 936

This book is outlined to encourage thought. If more Americans do not start thinking, our nation will be damned to generations of tyrannical oppression.

This book has been strongly inspired by every American who loves their life and has passion for their work. In addition to these enumerable nameless philosophers I must give special credit to Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand and every other advocate of the free market.

Thanks to all the military service personnel who make freedom possible.

Finally I must give special thanks to my dad, who is the hardest working person that I regularly get to have dinner with. And of course, no list of thanks can be complete without mom.

Enjoy!

PS: Can somebody please make a movie, or reality TV show, of this material so that the majority of Americans, who read below an 8th grade level, can help save the country too.

## Chapter 1

##  Why America is the Greatest Nation in the World

America has become the greatest country in the world because of three primary factors: geography, democracy, and the individual pursuits of American people.

### Geography –

North America was alluring to all of the European countries because it had the plentiful resources that they did not. It was truly the land of plenty. It had mountains full of minerals, forests rich with resources, and expansive plains for planting.

The New World was further attractive to the Europeans because of its deep natural harbors connected to navigable waterways. The Europeans saw these harbors and waterways as their gateway to the resources of the new world. However, the Europeans were too far away to effectively maintain possession of these harbors and eventually lost control of them to the Colonial Americans. Once under American control, these harbors and waterways provided the lifeblood for American commerce and society by keeping shipping costs low.

### Democracy –

Novel political ideas were born out of the unique circumstances provided by the early American experience. Having gained control of the coast, the Americans chief concern now shifted to preserving their freedom they had fought so hard to gain. Although they had concerns about hostilities perpetrated by outside invasions; they were equally concerned with potential threats from within their own newly formed government. This skepticism led to the founding of our **federal constitutional republic** (we are not actually a democracy.) Essentially what this means is that we elect legislators to govern for us, according to a certain framework (the constitution) designed by us, the people. The structure of this government was designed to protect the people from encroachments on their freedom and encourage the best leaders and political philosophies to advance.

Inclusion in the governmental process empowered everyday citizens by placing them in control of their own fate. Unlike any other country in the world, Americans chose their leaders. Accordingly, Americans also chose everything else; who/where they got their food and supplies from, where they went to worship, how they built their homes, etc. The result was a proliferation of competition and goods. The products that people wanted were accepted by the market and those that were less useful were rejected.

### The American People -

In America no one culture, religion, method of production, or style was considered best. If Americans felt they could do something better than it was currently being done; they went ahead and did it, or at least tried their hardest. The Americans who possessed the good fortune and ingenuity to make their ventures a success, continued to expand and improve their business until those services reached the natural limitations of the market. Those Americans whose ventures failed were compelled to try something new. Any American who was incapable of ingenuity, or was not yet completely expert in their present trade, relied purely on their industriousness for their sustenance. American value has always been determined by production. As a result, the American people are the most ingenious and industrious in the world.

It is only through the combination of these three factors that America has become the greatest country in the world.

America needs to do 3 things to maintain its preeminent position in the world: limit government interference with Americans, harvest America's natural resources, and cultivate American minds. Perhaps the greatest contradiction in America is the discord between the success generated by the free market economy and the refusal to adapt free market policies to some of America's most important sectors.

America was founded on the principle of limited central government and more robust local government. The central government was intended to provide strength and act as a singular entity when dealing with foreign affairs. The central government was not intended to intervene in local or personal matters, as those matters were best understood by that area's local representatives or the individuals themselves. Furthermore, the government has no right to infringe on any individual rights granted by the constitution. If we are to unleash the potential of the American people we must afford them the opportunity to pursue their happiness. Of course, some national taxes and national laws are necessary, however excessive taxation and regulation become prohibitive and eventually regressive.

Perhaps the most important thing America needs to do to remain the preeminent country in the world is to assume accountability for our actions. If our government is corrupt and inept, it is our fault for electing them; if our students are uneducated, it is our fault for misinforming them; if our children are lazy, it is our fault for not instilling proper values in them; if we become insolvent; it is because of how we allocated our resources; if our infrastructure crumbles, it is because we chose not to update it; if we fail as a nation; it will be because of apathy and we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

## Chapter 2

## Reform and streamline American Government

# "Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst an intolerable one." Thomas Paine.

Our government, as it is currently constituted, poses serious threats to our national security. The primary danger posed by our government is derived from the countless unqualified elected officials that govern our country.

There are two significant reasons we have bad elected officials.

We require no intellectual qualifications to hold government office.

We have limited political selection (most notably the two party system.)

The resulting unqualified officials generally fall into two categories; the corrupt and the incompetent:

The corrupt, are those who govern according to political favor (and are therefore incompetent because they are destroying our country.)

The incompetent, are those who govern entirely according to the wisdom of others (and therefore lack the knowledge to prevent themselves from being corrupted.)

These unqualified officials directly threaten American security because they are weak leaders; and weak leaders increase the immediate threat of foreign hostilities.

However, the indirect threat that these unqualified officials pose to America is potentially even more dangerous because it is harder to perceive. Unqualified officials threaten our independence by implementing policies that produce a (perceived) small short-term gain followed by generations of incurable consequences. This is the definition of a Faustian Bargain. Making matters even worse, often times the "small short term gain" is the election or re-election of various officials.

There are two types of Faustian policies that are most damaging to the future independence of America. (For more on these polices see Chapter 3.)

Those which unnecessarily increase the size and authority of the government at the expense of the tax payer.

These policies are often crafted by corruption, cronyism, or partisan politics and are usually designed for political gain rather than the benefit of the American people. One of the main detriments to these policies is that they are rarely disbanded after being created.

Those which seek to restrict American business or industry without proper cause.

These misguided policies are usually founded on misconceptions or misinformation and are largely supported by incompetence as they increase America's dependency on potentially hostile nations.

These bureaucratic policies make our government so inefficient that we run the risk of bankruptcy and therefore, jeopardize American independence.

In order to eliminate the implementation of injurious policies that threaten our future we must reform our government to ensure it produces more qualified leaders. The only way to constitutionally reform American government, is through the will of the American people. The first step to government reformation is to **encourage the education and participation of the American people**. The American public must recognize that all government officials are the SERVANTS of the American people; and it is the duty of the elected officials to enact the will of the American people. Therefore, Americans are entitled to demand a more effective and efficient government.

### Institute the Political Aptitude Test (The PAT.)

It is logical to assume that smarter officials will make smarter decisions.

In America you need to pass a test to: become a banker, a lawyer, a doctor, a pharmacist, or even to drive a vehicle; yet to be the leader of the free world and the driver of the world's largest economy, you need no qualifications at all! Not surprisingly, American politicians are often unqualified for the positions they hold. The solution is simple.

**All American politicians should have to take an aptitude test (with mandatory math, science and economics sections)** which pertains to the post they are trying to assume. There would be no passing or failing grades; the grades would simply help voters make more informed choices.

The ramifications of the political aptitude test ( **PAT** ) would be resounding.

Politically:

America would produce stronger candidates because unqualified potential candidates would be deterred by fear of inadequate intellectual exposure.

The party lines would hold less value as the candidate's scores (ideas) would trump their party affiliations.

Socially:

If properly administered, the test, could reignite American political passion.

It would RE-engage and empower the American public.

It would encourage Americans to consider new ideas.

The PAT is the first step in reforming government. We currently elect officials based on conjecture; and then determine if they are qualified for the position that they have been elected to. The PAT would filter out the less qualified candidates by enlightening the voting public to their intellectual shortcomings and strengths.

The format of the PAT would have two sections. The first part of the test would be designed to assess the factual knowledge that each candidate possessed. The second part of the test, short answers, would examine how each candidate would utilize their knowledge to deal with certain situations. The candidate's answers would then be graded and made public.

The PAT would finally allow voters to make educated decisions about who they were voting for. If the legislators do not feel comfortable taking the PAT, too bad, they are the SERVANTS of the people and are to do as they are told. The PAT is the start of true transparency in government because it affords all Americans a more realistic sample of each candidate's abilities.

The administration and presentation of the PAT is as important as the test itself. To ensure honesty and transparency, the PAT would be administered in a public forum and televised live nationwide. The purpose of having the PAT administered in this fashion is threefold.

The public administration and televisation of the PAT ensures that the candidates could not cheat and would provide a more accurate assessment of the candidates' qualifications and how they perform under pressure.

By broadcasting the PAT Americans would become engaged; and literally tune in.

By forcing the candidates to take an action, it reinforces their potential position as SERVANTS to the people.

Once the candidates had finished taking the PAT, the test would become available to the American public. That way, citizens could determine if they themselves were more capable of governing than those whom they elected.

The final benefit of the PAT is the tremendous revenues that it could generate. The main source of revenues would be advertising. If the PAT was marketed correctly it could be the most highly watched program in the history of television.

### Eliminate the powerful effect of the two major government parties.

# "Parties are a fundamental defect of free governments." De Tocqueville. Democracy in America. P 203

America is the best country in the world because of freedom of choice. Unfortunately, the present two-party system (which mimics a closed economic system) limits people's freedom of choice. The result of this limitation of choice is devastating to both the American government and the American people.

# "[Partisan politics] distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration.... agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one.... against another.... it opens the door to foreign influence and corruption..." George Washington.

More than 200 years later, our elective system continues to be plagued by partisan politics.

The two party system prevents efficiency in American government because:

It enables unqualified people to reach the top positions in our government.

It suppresses American political philosophy.

It prevents good laws and bills while enacting bad ones because legislators vote along party lines.

It fosters political squabbles which interfere with the will of the people.

The two party system weakens the American people.

The limitation in political choice polarizes the American people. Often times when Americans do engage in elections, their intention is only to oust the incumbent. American voters often vote AGAINST the candidate or party they HATE; rather than vote for a candidate that they LIKE.

It causes the American people to become disinterested in politics, and thus detracts from their empowerment.

The combination of disengaged and polarized citizens produced by the two party system poses serious threats to the future safety and stability of our nation.

So How Do We Fix The Problem?

The PAT is the first step in educating and engaging the American people.

By refocusing the importance on the candidate's qualifications, the PAT eliminates or lessens the importance of party affiliation.

The PAT gets America truly reenergized and re-engaged in politics. Not just about ousting the opposition; but about electing the people that are most qualified.

The PAT educates people about their potential leaders and the issues that face the nation.

The second step is to eliminate party affiliations on the ballots.

This simple step would mitigate the effect of irrational voters, who vote strictly along party lines. The problem with irrational voters is that they offset the votes of educated voters and therefore prohibit the best government.

By eliminating party affiliations on the ballot voters are more likely to vote for candidates that they believe in rather than voting against a candidate that they hate.

### Create an elective structure where more ideologies can advance.

America has an inefficient government because we have an elective structure that produces unqualified leaders and apathetic voters. A big step to securing the future of American freedom is to reform our elective process of government.

I think the structure should have multiple rounds of voting. In the first round all candidates (that met the assumed criteria, let's say 10,000 signatures) would be on the ballot. The four candidates that received the most votes from the first round would advance to the second round. A second round of voting amongst only those four candidates, would then occur. The two candidates with the highest total of votes from round two would then advance to the final round. The final round of election would be a one on one face off between the nation's two most supported candidates.

The effects of this multi-leveled election structure would have endless benefits to the nation.

Americans would become more political involved. Voters could finally vote for the candidate they wanted, rather than against the candidate they disliked. Thus more educated voters would participate.

By having the elective structure more closely mimic that of the free market, smear campaigns would be less prevalent. Politicians would be forced to advertise their own qualifications rather than trying to destroy the image and reputation of their opposition. As Milton Friedman knew, "There is no personal rivalry in the market place." P 119

Americans could feel more confident about the government officials that they elected as the best candidates would emerge and Americans would no longer be forced to choose between two compromised choices.

Fringe groups and fanatical ideologies would be prevented from ascending to power. A fringe group may survive one round of fluke voting, but the three rounded structure safeguards against the election of candidates who do not represent the majority.

If America wants to generate the best governmental policies, it should closely adhere to the free market system that has generated so much of our nation's success. Institute the PAT, remove party affiliations from ballots and create an elective structure which allows the American people to exercise political freedom of choice.

### Reform Presidential Powers (Curtail Presidential authority.)

# "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton.

The Presidential powers are strictly outlined in article II of the constitution. When crafting the Presidential powers, the ambition of the founders of America was twofold:

**To ensure, that Americans had a strong singular leader when dealing with foreign governments**. This strength is validated by the President's ability to be the Commander in Chief of the Army, Navy, and all state militias.

**To ensure, that political authority was not too concentrated in the hands of one person.** This safeguard is achieved by making most Presidential actions contingent upon authorization by two thirds (67%) of the Senate.

Read it for online for yourself; it is ONLY 3 pages. (Section 1 is largely concerned with the Presidential election, the other 3 sections concern Presidential powers.) Anything outside of these guidelines is unconstitutional.

Unfortunately, many of the men who have held the Presidential office have expanded the Presidential powers. Some Presidents **directly** expand the powers of the office, by invoking powers reserved for drastic times. FDR expanded Presidential powers by instituting price controls, and anti-communist legislation while Bush II expanded Presidential powers under the Patriot Act.

Other Presidents **indirectly** expand powers, by creating new government positions (agencies, coalitions, tsars, councils, tribunals, etc.) However, these agencies are actually an expansion of Presidential power because they answer directly to the President.

These "officials" are not elected by any citizens, rather they are direct appointees of the Presidential office. In effect, they become an unchecked extension of the Presidential office.

# "The consequence is that, as planning extends, the delegation of legislative powers to diverse boards and authorities becomes increasingly common... Constantly the broadest powers are conferred on new authorities which, without being bound by fixed rules, have almost unlimited discretion in regulating this or that activity of the people." FA Hayek. The Road to Serfdom. P 120

The negative ramifications derived from the expansion of Presidential powers are tremendous. Political authority is a finite resource. This means authority cannot be created; it can only be accrued by taking it from another or being granted it by another. **For one to gain authority; another must lose it.**

Expanded Presidential powers weaken local government or individual freedom. The office of the President is only strengthened by the weakening of a local authority.

As local elections become less important (because their authority has been usurped by the President), citizens become increasingly disinterested and participate less in the local elective process.

When the voters stop participating, it becomes easier for unworthy candidates to be elected (because they need less votes to steal an election.)

Expanded Presidential powers also have devastating social consequences. The more power the Presidential office has, the less freedom the individual has.

The more authority the President has, the less accountability the individual has.

The more freedom that Americans relinquish, the more dependent and the weaker they become.

Finally, expanded Presidential powers have the adverse effect of attracting megalomaniacs and dissuading sane people from running for office. As Milton Friedman believed, "The power will both attract and form men of a different stamp." The more power the Presidential office demands, the less altruistic people it will attract. Who in their right mind, would ever want to do the job of US President, as it is currently constituted?

# "The statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals, would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted to no council and senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. p 300

The positive effects of curtailing Presidential powers to their original scope are numerous:

Local government is empowered.

As local government becomes more important, more citizens become engaged in the governmental process.

More powerful local government encourages citizens to become more informed and active in their community.

Citizens become more engaged in politics; both voting and running for office, providing the nation a better government.

The will of the people is followed more closely creating a more stable society.

By limiting Presidential power and increasing local authority; better candidates are attracted to all levels of government.

###  Eliminate Presidential Re-election.

# "Intrigue and corruption are natural weaknesses of elective governments. But when the head of state can be re-elected, these weaknesses stretch out endlessly and threaten the very existence of the country." De Tocqueville Democracy in America. Page 159.

Presidential re-election is an impediment to American Government on many levels.

Re-election limits the productivity of the Presidential office.

The President cannot govern and campaign at the same time. The effect is a massive Presidential inefficiency in which the President governs for three years and campaigns for one. The President cannot effectively lead when re-election is a consideration (let alone the primary consideration.)

Re-election increases the chance of Presidential corruption, as support for re-elections are often gained through political favor.

Re-election presents the incumbent with an unfair advantage over his/her rivals because the incumbent has a platform which he/she can constantly address prospective voters. Notice how Presidential candidates generally appear to "move to the center" as their second term approaches. The result is that the incumbent is generally hard to unseat.

The solution is to limit the President to a single term. If need be, we can expand the term of office to 5 (or 6) years. The benefits of a single term are numerous:

The President would govern for the entire term, rather than working for 70% and campaigning for the other 30%. The American people would be spared much of this massive inefficiency.

Both Presidential candidates and candidates for local authorities would improve.

The President would no longer have to compromise his/her ideals to ensure reelection.

Local politicians would no longer pander to the President to ensure their well being.

With no incumbent advantage, elections would be on a more level playing field.

The solution to the expansion of the Presidential office is simple. Contract Presidential powers to those outlined in article II of the constitution and eliminate Presidential re-elections.

### Make Both Houses of Congress Accountable for Their Decisions.

# "We the people are the rightful masters of both the Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." Abraham Lincoln.

Fixing the houses of congress is not as difficult as one might imagine. These positions would benefit immensely from the reforms of the PAT, the elimination of the two-party system and the elimination of re-election. However, another major flaw of these elected positions is that they have so little accountability to those who elect them. The solution is simple:

Require members of Congress to initial every single page of every single bill that they pass or reject. This simple step would have a positive effect in three regards.

Laws and bills that were presented to congress would be forced to be shortened to a reasonable length to increase their chance of approval. (Laws and bills which were thousands of pages, like the 2009 stimulus package, could no longer be forced on the people.)

Congress would be responsible and accountable for all of their decisions. Congress would be far less likely to irresponsibly sign bills that they did not understand or fully support if they were required to initial each page.

The American people would have a far better understanding of exactly what our politicians believed in and voted for.

Likewise, we should also have greater insight into the beliefs of our elected senators. We must require Senators to vote "yes" or "no;" "present" should not be an option. Allowing senators to vote "present" has several detrimental effects to the American people.

It diminishes Senators accountability to the people they are intended to represent.

It obscures Senators values from the American people.

It provides a conduit for partisan politics.

### Disband Outdated Government Positions

# "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." Thomas Jefferson

The Electoral College is a perfect example of an inefficient waste of tax payer money on an outdated and unnecessary service. In the late 1700s The Electoral College was designed to make Presidential voting easier. Back then it was impossible to consolidate the votes from all over the United States in a timely manner. What was created was a group [college] of elected officials, who were intended to represent the collective will of the people from their respective districts. (Another secondary purpose of the Electoral College was to overrule the will of the people; in the event that the people voted for a dangerous candidate; this scenario is extremely unusual and virtually unprecedented.) We can keep the current voting structure in place, where 50.00001% of the voters of a state determine who the entire state votes for; but with technological advances, we no longer need a ceremonial government head to read who the people voted for.

The benefits of eliminating the Electoral College are numerous:

Ensure the collective will of each district is enacted. Electorates would no longer be able to vote contrary to the will of their constituents.

Encourage more, direct, government participation.

Prove to the American people that the government is ready to embrace efficiency and reform.

### Conclusion:

Many of our elected officials illustrate clear examples of the flawed leadership that our governmental system produces. If we want better officials, we need to establish better ways for allowing our best and brightest minds to lead our nation.

## Chapter 3

## Refocus America's Collective Resources

(What American Tax Dollars Should And Should Not Be Spent On.)

# "Great nations are never impoverished by private, though they sometimes are by public prodigality and misconduct." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. P 236

Introduction:

Waste and mismanagement are so pervasive throughout our government that our national safety is in jeopardy. An unsound economy poses two principal threats to American sovereignty.

A nation that is weak economically is subject to the will of economically stronger nations.

Economically weak nations are also more likely to suffer large scale municipal bankruptcies which threaten all citizens. The dangers of large scale municipal bankruptcies are twofold.

A bankrupt state (or to a lesser extent a city) cannot properly police itself and therefore poses a danger to all Americans. Under-policed municipalities are a haven for organized crime, terrorism, and black market economies.

The second danger posed by bankrupted municipalities is the polarizing effect they could have on the nation if a totalitarian government forces responsible citizens to bailout irresponsible municipalities. People who have elected responsible governments will inherently be resentful of those people whom they are forced to bail out who acted irresponsibly in electing their respective government.

The easiest way to ensure the future safety of the American people is to ensure our financial solvency. As George Friedman believes, "A nation that doesn't control its own financial system has gone a long way to losing its sovereignty."(The Next Decade, P 152) If we become financially sound, we become exponentially safer from both foreign hostilities and domestic polarization.

In order to ensure that America maintains its success, we must manage our budget more responsibly. Every dollar that is squandered is a dollar that could have been allocated for a viable service or need. Every hour labored without purpose is an hour of labor that could have been dedicated to the securitization of American independence.

On the surface many Governmental actions and social programs appear to be beneficial, however upon deeper inspection, most are actually quite harmful. One prevalent problem with social programs is that they are more quickly implemented than they are disbanded. (Often the promise of a social program is a way to secure a large voting block.) Another big problem with many social programs is that although they may benefit one group, it is often at the expense of another.

Although there are countless social programs that have some merit, it is not fair to force people to redistribute their earnings to causes that they do not benefit from (and may be contrary to their beliefs or interests.)

# "There is, perhaps, nothing more likely to disturb the tranquility of nations, than their being bound to mutual contributions for any common object, which does not yield an equal and coincident benefit. For it is an observation as true, as it is trite, that there is nothing men differ so readily about, than the payment of money." Hamilton. The Federalist Papers. P 40

In order to effectively ensure that America maintains social stability we must reconsider what collective expenditures are truly vital for the advancement of **all** Americans.
PART 1:

### Allocate our collective government resources responsibly.

# "First the scope of government must be limited. Its major function must be to protect our freedom both from our enemies outside our gates and from our fellow citizens: to preserve law and order, to enforce private contracts, [and] to foster competitive markets... Beyond this major function, government may enable us at times to accomplish jointly what we would find it more difficult to or expensive to accomplish severally. However, any such use of government is fraught with danger." Milton Friedman. Capitalism and Freedom. Page 2

Although the importance of some government programs are debatable, there are several examples of government waste that are so outlandish that after considering all the facts, few could argue their merits.

The outlandish salaries of corrupt politicians. Bell, California is a perfect example, where the City Manager made $787,000, his assistant made $376,000 and the police chief made $457,000. **Those are annual salaries not lifetime earnings**. What makes matters worse is that Bell is a poor community, where the average income is under $40,000 per year.

The United States Census Bureau spent 2.5 Million dollars on a Superbowl commercial.

The United States allocated 1.8 Million dollars for the Museum of Neon Sign in Las Vegas, NV.

The refusal of many federal employees to fly coach costs taxpayers **$146 million** annually in flight upgrades.

Taxpayers regularly fund paintings of high-ranking government officials at a cost of up to **$50,000 apiece**.

However, there are some forms of waste that seem less egregious, but are just as costly. Let's examine two examples of seemingly innocuous government undertakings:

Renaming municipal property:

Every few years some politician decides to garner political favor by championing the renaming of a highway, bridge, or some other shared structure. Occasionally it is necessary to rename a great piece of public property; however in general, the renaming of public property is usually the result of political corruption and or favoritism. Renaming a bridge, highway, or street is not just a nice tribute to the person it is named for, it is also an enormous political and financial undertaking. The problems with renaming municipal property are twofold:

The amount of money needed to change the name of a municipal property is far more costly than one immediately realizes. One must consider: the cost of production and transportation for the new sign, the cost of labor required to take down and destroy the old sign, and the labor required for the installment of the new sign. This process must then be repeated with all the corresponding signs that direct people to the renamed property. Furthermore, all maps must also be changed. In effect it costs millions of dollars to rename certain properties and the change provides no increase in revenue.

The other financial loss derived from the renaming of municipal property is the time that is allocated by tax paid officials to debate the matter. Every meeting which is spent deciding which former politician to honor is a meeting that could have been designed to increase domestic security.

It cost at least 4 Million dollars just to **RENAME** the Triboro Bridge (which connected the 3 boros of Manhattan, Queens and the Bronx) to the RFK Bridge. I wonder if any of those championing this name change were trying to cater to the large voting block of seniors with fond memories of the Kennedys?

Another seemingly innocuous expenditure that is actually quite costly is the Presidential inaugural celebration.

I was in Washington D.C about a month before the inauguration of President Obama. I was disgusted to see the preparations for the party were already well under way. First of all, one must question a person who celebrates being elected to the most difficult job on earth. However, the problem is not the celebration; it is the celebration at the expense of the tax payer. Think about this, everyone in America pays for the victory party of a candidate that is only supported by just over 50% of America. To force all Americans to pay for a **victory celebration** for 51% Americans is the epitome of the tyranny of the majority.

The major issue I had with the celebration was the amazing misallocation of resources for the ego of one individual. The amount of workers (most of whom were paid by tax dollars) who were preparing for the celebration was astounding. Unfortunately, these workers were not doing anything to help America. They were not paving our roads, educating our children, rebuilding our infrastructure, securing our borders, or any other actual purpose. **The purpose of tax dollars is to protect and advance America; it is not to massage the egos of the already powerful.**

The total cost of the Obama inaugural party was estimated conservatively at 150 million dollars.

At first an inaugural party for a President or honoring a great American with a municipal property seems like a harmless enough action. However, when you consider that our collective resources are limited, it is clear that superfluous projects like these should not be funded by tax dollars.

Unfortunately, to become solvent we must rid our budgets of more than just the outlandish and the superfluous (we need hundreds of Billions of dollars to balance the budget.) We have to make serious cuts to our collective expenditures and that requires a frank and mature discussion of what our collective finances should be spent on.

There are countless government agencies that are completely disposable (not to mention unconstitutional.) We must examine **every** federal program and agency in existence and determine their actual purpose and the value of that purpose to the nation. We then must eliminate and pare down all the non essential expenditures.

There are several examples of collective spending that are very sensitive political topics and are therefore often hedged by politicians. Although many of these examples of collective spending have become commonplace in modern America, it is my contention that these allocations are more than just economically ruinous; they are immoral and contrary to natural law.

### Social Security:

Economically, Social Security is a giant Ponzi scheme. It is predicated on new members paying for old ones. The system is entirely contingent upon sustained population and economic growth. Any substantial variation in population growth or economic development renders the system highly volatile.

Furthermore, the artificial incentive to quit working deprives the nation of a substantial percentage of the workforce.

However the moral consequences of Social Security are just as injurious.

Morally, Social Security absolves individuals from the responsibility of determining their own well being in their advanced age. Although social security only siphons a small percentage of each worker's earnings, it is nevertheless, **a contradiction of natural law to assume that a third party would be better able to ensure the survival of an individual than would the individual on its own**.

The second moral drawback of Social Security is that is deprives many older people of a purpose in life. Many people are deeply connected to their jobs. Jobs are not only a means of financing life, they are also forums for mental and social exercise. To assume that older people are unable to work is insulting and naïve.

Unfortunately Social Security has become so ingrained in our society that it will be hard to uproot. However, the system as it is presently constituted presents grave dangers. Every year that the life expectancy in the United States increases, further strain is put on the Social Security coffers. To alleviate the building stresses on Social Security we must continually increase the age at which individuals become eligible for it.

Ultimately, I think that individuals will be better off without social security as they will be more directly responsible for investing in their own future.

### Transition Welfare to Workfare:

Prolonged payment for people who produce nothing is a recipe for disaster.

# "Such people, as they themselves produce nothing, are all maintained by the produce of other men's labour. When multiplied, therefore, to an unnecessary number, they may in a particular year consume so great a share of this produce, as not to leave a sufficiency for maintaining the productive labourers, who should reproduce it next year. The next year's produce, therefore, will be less than that of the foregoing, and if the same disorder should continue, that of the third year will be still less than that of the second." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. P 237

However, a small amount of welfare (1 to 3 months) is arguably a good thing for both individuals and the economy. The individuals benefit from a small financial cushion because it allows them to search for work in their area of expertise, rather than being forced to take a job (which they perceive as temporary) for survival.

The economy also benefits from this small financial cushion because it allows workers to find the field where they are most productive. When laborers operate in their field of expertise, they receive the most recompense for their work, and as a result have that much more disposable income available for circulation in the economy. Another benefit from a small financial cushion is that employers do not suffer the inefficiency of training employees who secretly intend to quit as soon as they find a job in their area of expertise.

The arguments for limited welfare have some merit. However, like most government programs, welfare has become a bloated disaster.

The consequences of paying people **not** to work for extended periods of time are devastating for both society and the individual:

Prolonged welfare instills the idea that the individual is owed, or entitled to things; not that they need to earn them.

Prolonged welfare creates a dependency on the government (which is an inherent contradiction because welfare recipients are also voters.)

Prolonged welfare deters people from learning new skills that they would during job experience.

Prolonged welfare destroys communities by allowing people to spurn their neighborhood and still receive their sustenance from a central authority.

Welfare raises the price of all labor by removing a certain amount of workers from the work force. Fewer laborers means that the consumers pay more for labor and goods.

Considering the crumbling infrastructure of America, why do we continue to pay laborers not to work when there are so many jobs to be done!?

Rather than paying citizens not to work, the government should temporarily employ the jobless to rebuild our antiquated infrastructure and update our ancient power grid. These projects would benefit all Americans.

The unemployed would benefit from the temporary employment and the job experience. The American people would benefit from a decrease in crime as a result of the increased employment. Furthermore, the benefit of the rebuilt infrastructure would decrease transportation costs affording individuals and businesses more disposable income. Likewise, rebuilding our power grid would lower our energy costs and provide Americans additional disposable income. These expenditures benefit the entire nation because they provide individuals more disposable income, which they can invest in the expertise of others, thus reducing the likelihood of future disproportionate unemployment.

Anyone who has driven around America is aware that our infrastructure is greatly in need of renovation. Many of our sewers, roads, and railways were built 100 years ago. However, what many people do not realize is that our power grid is just as outdated. In addition to improving the efficiency of our grid, an improved grid could facilitate the free market energy economy of the future.

### Eliminate or greatly reduce public housing.

Public housing has injurious effects on the economy and the majority of the individuals who live in or near it. The economy suffers from public housing because it reduces the stock of available housing, thus raising the price of all the remaining (private) housing. This increase in the cost of housing results in a decrease in disposable income.

However, the more hazardous effect created by public housing is that it condenses poverty.

Condensing poverty is poisonous for the economy because it impedes the path to prosperity. Individuals become wealthy as a result of being employed by another person, or by independently selling goods or services to consumers. Unfortunately, areas of highly concentrated poverty have very limited employment opportunities and very few consumers who can afford non essential goods and services.

When an individual from an area of condensed poverty does receive employment (or an opportunity to sell their goods or services) they are often forced to travel long distances to reach their employer (or their consumers.) These long commutes limit the worker's earning potential. One must consider both the monetary cost of the commute and the opportunity cost of the commute. Obviously the monetary cost of commuting increases corresponding to the distance travelled; the longer the distance, the more expensive the commute. However, one must also consider the opportunity cost lost from long commutes. Every hour that an individual spends commuting is an hour that he/she is unable to work and earn additional income. Consequentially, it is much harder to make money in areas where poverty is highly concentrated. The result of condensing the poor is a proliferation of poverty which becomes increasingly difficult to escape.

# "But poverty, though it does not prevent the generation, is extremely unfavourable to the rearing of children. The tender plant is produced, but in so severe a climate that it soon withers and dies." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. P 67

Another ramification of highly concentrated poverty is that it exacerbates the hardships of being poor. First and foremost, as the previous paragraph has shown, Government housing makes it increasingly difficult for one to earn a living and escape a life of destitution. Concentrating poverty also intensifies the social problems associated with insolvency. Housing projects have a higher concentration of single parent families. Children of single parent families are more likely to engage in criminal behavior than children from traditional families. Therefore, in areas of concentrated poverty, crime and violence are generally more abundant.

However the saddest social consequence of Government housing is the destruction of the public schools in those areas. As noted above, areas of concentrated poverty are more likely to be comprised of single parent families and children from single parent families are more likely to engage in regressive behavior. As the number (and percentage) of undisciplined students in a classroom increases, it becomes increasingly difficult to teach the intended material. Accordingly, it becomes increasingly difficult for any student to receive a good education and escape the cycle of poverty.

# "Children of broken families (single parent, single mother in particular) are especially likely to be 'problem' children and a high concentration of such children is likely to increase juvenile delinquency. One manifestation has been the adverse effect on schools in the neighborhood of a public housing project. Whereas a school can absorb a few 'problem' children it is very difficult to absorb a large number. Yet in some cases, broken families are a third of more of the total housing project and the project may account for the majority of children in that school." Milton Friedman. Capitalism & Freedom. P 180.

Government housing concentrates poverty, in effect, multiplying the hardships of destitution. What's worse is that government housing actually promotes poverty in two significant ways.

First, government housing condenses poverty creating an economic desert where there are no business owners to employ laborers and no consumers to purchase goods or services. This mandated concentration of poverty also lowers the value of the surrounding real estate, forcing the poor to travel further (and expend more resources) to find employment.

The second way in which government housing propagates poverty is by rendering the public schools in their proximity ineffective. This degradation of the public schools is so injurious to the poor because by diluting their means to education, the government is directly limiting their ability for wealth creation.

Government housing creates a vicious cycle increasing the concentration of poverty which becomes progressively more difficult to escape. The solution is to limit the government's involvement with housing. Rather than the government providing the physical housing, Milton Friedman proposes the government provides housing grants to the poor. Friedman's solution has several benefits. Housing grants would spread poor people more evenly throughout society and, as a result, afford them more opportunities for economic and social mobility.

One means to affluence that would improve is the access to education. No longer would poor students be stuck attending second rate schools surrounded by undisciplined "problem" children. The second benefit to dispersing poverty is that poor people who are surrounded by individuals with disposable income have far more employment opportunities than those surrounded by abject poverty. Finally, evenly dispersing poverty throughout society mollifies the potential for hostilities as citizens (off all economic standings) would share more commonalities.

### Eliminate FEMA

First and foremost, let's examine what FEMA does. According to their acronym (Federal Emergency Management Agency,) FEMA manages emergencies from a central authority. So FEMA is essentially a form of public insurance.

And who pays for FEMA? The answer is that FEMA is supported by the tax payers. This support is NOT voluntary; it is involuntarily apportioned from the taxes which we are forced to pay.

**Therefore upon reflection, it is clear that FEMA is actually government mandated disaster insurance**.

This nationally mandated disaster insurance, called FEMA, is unconstitutional (just like Obama Care) and should therefore be eliminated entirely.

Beyond being unconstitutional, FEMA is also fundamentally inefficient in that it performs virtually the same services as the National Guard. Although the cost varies from year to year, the average yearly budget for FEMA is around $20 billion dollars!

The final major flaw with FEMA is that it perverts the free market by ambiguously mixing the federal government with the insurance industry.

FEMA is not the only wasteful government agency, but for the sake of expediency I will not address any additional agencies.

### Eliminate government bailouts, subsidies, and stimuli.

Bailouts:

In a free market economy the government is intended to act like an impartial umpire who referees the competition of individuals. Clearly if the government is bailing certain companies out the playing field is not level.

# "The existence of a free market does not of course eliminate the need for government. On the contrary, government is essential both as a forum for 'determining the rules for the game' and as an umpire to interpret and enforce the rules decided on. What the market does is to reduce greatly the range of issues that must be decided through political means, and thereby to minimize the extent to which government need participate directly in the game." Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom. Page 15.

There are several threats that government bailouts pose to American safety.

Bailouts create a sense of entitlement. If we bailout banks, why not retailers, why not restaurants, why not artists, why not students?

Bailouts prevent the free market from effectively cleansing itself of toxic corporations. (Companies which act responsibly do not need bailouts.)

Bailouts prevent the growth of new emerging companies and industries. The companies that the government is artificially holding up are also preventing the rise of new companies.

Bailouts ensnare the government with the potential pitfalls of the companies which they are associated.

The government should be involved with private enterprise as little as possible. This separation is mutually beneficial to the government and the corporations. The corporations benefit because they are not forced to compete against the government. The government benefits because it is protected from any negative associations with industries or corporations.

Subsidies:

Subsidies are a perversion of the free market that invites crony capitalism and other forms of corruption.

The solution is to eliminate **all** government subsidies.

The government should have no involvement in the success or failure of any legal private enterprise. Any involvement by the government quickly degenerates into crony capitalism and breeds political distrust. As mentioned above, integration of business and government is a disastrous proposition. Private companies suffer because they struggle to compete against the insurmountable resources of the government. The government suffers because it becomes directly connected to any negative associations related to the company or industry which it is subsidizing.

Stimulus:

"Stimulus," "Quantitative Easing," and/or "Operation Twist" are all the same thing; COUNTERFITTING. When the government artificially increases the supply of dollars; they are stealing from you by decreasing the value of the dollar. Additionally, artificially increasing the monetary supply, perverts the free market. The result is that old inefficient companies are propped up, while vibrant emerging companies are prevented from growing. The ultimate effect of government stimulus is to redistribute earnings and to protect the status quo.

A huge step toward fiscal responsibility comes from eliminating bailouts, subsidies and stimulus. These irresponsible allocations are inefficient unnatural perversions of the free market which serve to lower confidence in capitalism and the American government.

The proceeding list of inefficient, wasteful federal expenditures is far from comprehensive. However, the point is proven that the value of many of our collective expenditures range from inefficient to immoral. Although it is enraging to see municipal inefficiency, it is tragic to witness an American life bridled by the bureaucracy of the state.
Part 2:

### Reform detrimental Policies, Laws and Regulations

# "Any man of energy and initiative in this country can get what he wants out of life. But when initiative is crippled by legislation or by a tax which denies him the right to receive a reasonable share of his earnings, then he will no longer exert himself and the country will be deprived of his energy on which its continued greatness depends." Mellon.

### Contract Minimum Wage to its Natural Definition:

Wages cannot be fixed (without perverting the free market) because demand for labor cannot be fixed. Adam Smith defines minimum wage as the recompense necessary to sustain life and produce offspring.

# "A man must always live by his work, and his wages must at least be sufficient to maintain him. They must even upon most occasions be somewhat more; otherwise it would be impossible for him to bring up a family, and the race of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation. Mr. Cantillon seems, upon this account, to suppose that the lowest species of common labourers must every where earn at least double their own maintenance, in order that one with another they may be enabled to bring up two children; the labour of the wife, on account of her necessary attendance on the children, being supposed no more than sufficient to provide for herself." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. P 57

Smith's definition of minimum wage is logical and biological. His concept is unequivocally bolstered by millions of flourishing organisms throughout the universe. Therefore his, is the only rational (and true) definition of a minimum wage.

On the contrary, the present day American concept of minimum wage is political and arbitrary. It has no foundation and no natural rational. A monetary minimum wage is impossible to determine because the commodities and services that each individual requires to sustain life are unique. Furthermore, these essential commodities and services, constantly fluctuate in cost. Therefore, governmental determination of a minimum wage is completely arbitrary.

Governmental establishment of a fixed minimum compensation only achieves one objective; the perversion of the free market. A government imposed minimum wage is akin to financial mirage; it looks bountiful from afar, but as one inspects it more closely, the benefits vanish.

Minimum wage appears to benefit the poor by increasing their wages. This is nothing more than a financial illusion. When wages are artificially increased, there are more dollars competing for the same goods and services. The result is that goods and services increase in price accordingly. Therefore the minimum wage laborer may receive a higher wage, but his/her purchasing power never increases. Those who do not receive a wage increase are now poorer, because they can purchase less goods and services with the same amount of dollars that they could before. **An individual is not rich because of how much money they possess; but because of how much purchasing power their money possesses**.

# "Every man is rich or poor according to the degree in which he can afford to enjoy the necessaries, conveniences, and amusements of human life." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. P. 26

Another drawback to artificially high minimum wage is that it discourages employers from legally hiring new workers. Additionally, artificially high wages result in the formation and growth of black market economies which deprive the state of revenue and deprive the workers of all protection.

###  Legalize marijuana and reform prison sentencing accordingly

# "A law not repealed continues in force, not because it _cannot_ be repealed, but because it is _not_ repealed; and the non repealing passes for consent." Thomas Paine. Common Sense. P 110

The amount of people that use marijuana is undeniably large. Not surprisingly, the size of the marijuana economy is tremendous. (It is largely believed to be California's largest cash crop.) Denying this industry's legitimacy has several disastrous personal and economic consequences.

Personally:

First and foremost, preventing an American from pursuing his/her own choice, which does not interfere with the freedom of others, is an undeniable infringement upon personal liberty.

# "No legislative act therefore contrary to the constitution can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid." Alexander Hamilton. The Federalist Papers P 78

Enforcing this unjust prohibition turns good citizens into "criminals." These otherwise upstanding citizens are then perennially burdened with the weight of a criminal conviction.

Keep in mind, the majority of people who are **convicted** of marijuana offenses are poor people that cannot afford the legal representation necessary to convince the courts of their innocence.

Economically, marijuana criminalization creates two major problems: it unnecessarily strains our limited collective resources, while cultivating and fostering a black market.

Criminalization clogs our legal system. About 50% of all arrests in America are drug related. Over 50% of all drug arrests are for marijuana violations. Therefore, roughly 25% of our prison population is incarcerated because of a mild intoxicant.

Criminalization clogs our prisons and jails. The national average cost to incarcerate an inmate is over $28,000 per year.

Criminalization pits certain Americans against other Americans. Certain counties benefit financially from the number of inmates that they house; therefore it is in the best interest of certain individuals to perceive other individuals as criminals.

Criminalization fosters and proliferates a black market economy. (I believe that the market for marijuana is so large and universal that marijuana actually acts as an alternative black market currency.)

Criminalization deprives the American public of the vast financial resources that could be generated through marijuana taxation.

Criminalization makes marijuana easier than alcohol to procure for minors.

Criminalization introduces people, particularly minors, to other "more dangerous" drugs.

Criminalization does not allow for the trade's necessary protection, therefore those who operate in the trade often protect their investments independently. Because marijuana dealers cannot seek legal help from a bad deal or a robbery they often secure their business with guns. Many times these guns are unregistered and part of the black market.

Criminalization of cultivation, directly results in production abroad and often enriches dangerous people in third world nations.

America cannot afford to waste any more time, money, or manpower fighting American curiosity. Just as prohibition was doomed for failure, so is the "war on marijuana." The reason these restrictive policies are unenforceable, is because human beings have a propensity to slightly alter their perspective.

I would love to say that all drugs should be legal, because individuals should have freedom of choice. However, certain drugs are so powerful that they pose a legitimate danger to all the other members of society. Drugs that do not significantly endanger any citizen, other than the one using them, should be made legal. This means that less potent drugs like alcohol, marijuana, tobacco, and caffeine should be (or remain) legal.

However, other drugs pose dangers to all members of society, not just the individual using them. A good example of a drug that threatens all citizens is "bath salts." "Bath salts" is a new drug that has been connected to extreme violence and psychosis. (Bath salts has been connected to the crazed naked man eating the face of another man on a Florida causeway.) Clearly a drug that increases an individual's strength while inducing a violent psychosis is a danger to all members of society and should be made illegal.

Highly addictive drugs also pose a serious danger to all citizens. The addictiveness of certain drugs are so powerful that they can turn otherwise good citizens into crazed addicts. These crazed addicts are a danger to society because they will do anything to fulfill their addiction. Any drug that produces an addiction so strong that the addict is willing to die to fulfill it should be made illegal.

By legalizing marijuana and other less harmful drugs, the government would have far more resources to allocate towards combating more dangerous drugs, or any other national issue.

### Prison Reform:

We spend way too much money on prisoners in America. The first step to reducing this expenditure is reconsidering who we imprison. We should not be imprisoning people for any marijuana related offences, except driving under the influence, or providing marijuana to children. This provision would eliminate a large percentage of the imprisoned population.

Additionally, non violent drug offenders should also be separated from the regular prison population. These individuals should be incarcerated in a treatment facility.

In contrast, there should be no distinction between white collar crime and regular crime. Stealing is stealing. We cannot have different standards for different income brackets. (This will be explored more in chapter 5.) Wealthy criminals should suffer the same fate as destitute ones.

Separating the drug offenders reduces the prison population to a manageable number. Furthermore, the prisoners that remained in the concentrated population would now be serious criminals. Because they are serious criminals, they have virtually no rights. (When an individual commits a crime against another member of society, they relinquish their right to exist freely.) As a result of their diminished rights they should be very inexpensive to incarcerate. Although prisoners should be treated humanely, prisoners should have very minimal rights and should not be afforded luxuries like television, air conditioning or any other pleasantries of the free world.

Furthermore prisoners should be forced to work to earn their keep. Tax payers should not be forced to pay for the sustenance of criminals. These criminals have given up their right to live in a free society and should therefore not be afforded any of the rights derived from that free society. Making criminals work would alleviate financial stress which results from their incarceration. Furthermore, criminals desiring rehabilitation, could learn employment skills and discipline that could potentially assist them in finding employment upon release. Finally diminishing prisoner's rights would be a deterrent to crime. Prison should be considered a terrible place that no moral man would ever want to be in, not a place where the immoral go to get warm, be fed, or receive dental care.

If we want to discourage crime and lower the costs of incarceration, we must first determine who we consider criminals and then treat those criminals accordingly. It is immoral to incarcerate individuals for personal choices (that do not cause harm to other citizens,) likewise it is financially ruinous to force tax payers to fund the unwarranted incarceration. If the government continues to criminalize personal choices, our economy will suffer diminished growth and our citizens will suffer the lifelong personal consequences of the unwarranted convictions.

Clearly as one can see there is no easy solution to balancing America's budget. However, it is clear that Keynesian economics is not the answer to achieving American prosperity. In fact, this chapter proves that these misguided and mismanaged collectivist policies have started America down the road to serfdom. The first step to ensuring American prosperity is reducing the size and scope of the federal government. In order to reduce the size and scope of the government we must elect better officials. In order to elect better officials we must have better educated citizens. Which brings us to Chapter 4, Education.

## Chapter 4

## Education

# "Man cannot survive except through his mind. He comes on earth unarmed. His brain is his only weapon. Animals obtain food by force. Man has no claws, no fangs, no horns, no great strength of muscle. He must plant his food or hunt it. To plant he needs a process of thought. To hunt, he needs weapons, and to make weapons- a process of thought. From the simplest necessity to the religious abstraction, from the wheel to the skyscraper, everything we are and everything we have comes from a single attribute of man – the function of his reasoning mind." Ayn Rand. The Fountainhead. Page 679

American education needs a complete renovation if it is to remain the vanguard of global education. Many of the troubles with education are derived from its entanglement with bureaucracy. Unfortunately when government becomes involved with education it can squander financial resources as well as our greatest resource, American minds.

The primary problem with the American Education system is that the rising costs of the educational institutions do not support the diminishing returns garnered by the students. Or put more simply, in 2012 in America, we pay a lot of money for a second rate education. This value disparity is pervasive at all levels of American education from kindergarten through doctoral programs.

There are several reasons the American education system does not generate its intended returns:

### The monopoly of the Public School System.

One of the main reasons that education is so expensive is because public schools have a near monopoly on the industry. Whenever a monopoly exists the consumers suffer because they are at the will of the supplier. Public schools (suppliers of education) do not need to be well run because they have no competition. The result is the public school students (consumers of education) receive a compromised education.

The solution is simple, introduce vouchers for school choice. Vouchers would allow new vibrant educational institutions to flourish while simultaneously depriving decrepit failing institutions of the funds which they were squandering. Rather than unquestionably accepting the education that the state provides, vouchers allow parents to shop for the best education available to their children.

Vouchers will create better schools through competition. Additionally, vouchers will encourage public schools to be more innovative and will encourage parents to be more active in their children's education.

### The Teachers Union.

# "Not all schooling is education nor all education schooling. The proper subject of concern is education. The activities of the government are mostly limited to schooling." Milton Friedman. Capitalism and Freedom. P 86

The teachers union fights to protect and enhance the rights of its members. My question is, Who are they fighting against? They are only two logical adversaries of the teachers union: the students or the tax payers.

The primary objective of the teachers union is to protect and strengthen the power of their union. The teachers union is not concerned with the best interest of the students or the tax payers. In fact, the teachers union often acts in direct opposition to the best interest of the students and the nation. Here are some notable examples of how the teachers union acts against the better interest of the students and tax payers.

The teachers union prevents bad teachers from being fired. Every bad teacher that the union protects is taking the place of a potentially great educator.

The teachers union increases the cost of all educational undertakings leaving less funds for the actual education of the students.

The teachers union places students in potentially dangerous situations by protecting teachers who are sex offenders.

Bad teachers (whose jobs are protected by the union) do not properly educate students. And students who are not properly educated put a strain on the economy.

Most teachers are intelligent, compassionate, scholars who care about students; the teachers union does not. Clearly the teachers union is bad for students, bad for tax payers and bad for the economy as a whole.

The solution is simple: **disband the teachers union**.

### Curriculum Reform.

# "[Think] of all the living species that train their young in the art of survival, the cats who teach their kittens to hunt, the birds who spend such strident effort on teaching their fledglings to fly – yet man, whose tool of survival of the mind, does not merely fail to teach a child to think, but devotes the child's education to the purpose of destroying his brain..." Ayn Rand. Atlas Shrugged. Page 910

Our curriculum is in drastic need of complete reformation. Since we do not have infinite resources, we must choose which academic subjects best prepare individuals for survival. Upon reflection, certain subjects assuredly better prepare individuals than others.

Our educational focus, starting from a very young age, should be on science, math, economics, and history. A strong understanding in these primary fields provides an individual with the best chance for survival in today's world.

**Science** provides one the knowledge to harness and master nature.

**Math** provides a foundation for processing, cataloguing, and deciphering information.

**Economics** allows one to efficiently budget their time and other resources.

**Historical** **study** ensures we do not commit the same folly twice.

When determining the value of an academic subject, consider the subjects relevance in a survival situation (which is what life is.) Although the study of theoretical, artistic, and abstract subjects, are important (and fun,) they are not necessary for survival and should be considered of secondary importance. This does not mean eliminate the other subjects; it means focus on the most important subjects.

# "There are only 24 hours in a day, and a decision to teach one subject is also a decision not to teach another subject. The question is not whether trigonometry is important, but whether it is more important than statistics; not whether an educated person should know the classics, but whether it is more important for an educated person to know the classics than elementary economics." Bryan Caplan. P 198. Myth of the Rational Voter.

Not only must we reform what we teach, we must also reform how we teach.

Students learn best when they directly benefit from learning. Conversely, students learn very little when they believe what they are studying has no relevance.

# "A young man naturally conceives an aversion to labour (or schooling,) when for a long time he receives no benefit from it." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. P 106

The solution is to correlate education and employment (where individuals are rewarded with money for doing a good job.) By directly correlating learning with wealth creation, students would clearly see the value in education.

### Additional curriculum reforms:

# "A stable and democratic society is impossible without a minimum degree of literacy and knowledge on the part of most citizens and without widespread acceptance of some common set of values." Milton Friedman. Capitalism and Freedom. Page 86

There are several books which should be read, (reread,) and studied by every American student.

**The Wealth of Nations –** This book describes the framework of the society in which we live. It describes how our system is designed to work and how to maintain it.

**The Federalist Papers –** This collection of essays is from 3 of the brightest political minds in American History. The essays describe the reasons for forming the United States.

**Common Sense –** This short book is probably the most important book in early American history. Thomas Paine explains why Americans, and all other men, should be free. He vehemently opposes both colonization and slavery, lambasting any man who oppresses another. This book is widely regarded as the most important book for establishing America's independence.

**The Constitution –** This monumental literary work provides the framework of our government. This work outlines the rights of the individual as well as the limitations of the government.

These literary works are important because they illustrate how America's founding principles apply to every American. In addition to better preparing individuals to survive and thrive in our society, these writings also serve as a common bond reinforcing the link which all Americans share with one another. This common literary bond would also produce beneficial national consequences.

Americans would be more engaged in politics and therefore, would make it harder for politicians to usurp authority and exploit citizens.

Americans would be less likely to commit crimes against people that they have a strong connection to. These works emphasize the commonalities of all Americans.

Americans could have more cordial and effective dialogue when discussing economic, social and political issues because everyone would better understand the foundation of our society. Additionally, a common literary bond would reduce communication errors by creating a standard set of terminology. (Think about how many problems and conflicts are created entirely from communication errors.)

The fact, that every American is not educated regarding these literary works borders on conspiratorial.

Unless we develop a better informed populace, our nation will become too weak and polarized to combat oppression.

# "How can tyranny be resisted in a country where each person is weak and where individuals are not united by any shared concerns?" De Tocqueville. Democracy in America. P 114

### Students and their parents.

Students should come to every level of school prepared to learn. Students who are not prepared to learn create an educational dead weight which holds back the rest of their class and society as a whole.

In order to make education in school more efficient, parents must play a larger role in preparing their children. Before enrolling in school, young children should be taught basics like potty training, non violence, and an **ability to listen**. A single student lacking these basic skills can postpone the education of an entire class. Furthermore, a student lacking these skills can create the impression of school as an unsafe place. Parents who do not properly prepare children for enrollment are a perennial burden on society.

Keeping up with a child's academic education becomes increasingly difficult as they get older. However, parents must educate their children as much as possible. Every lessen taught by a parent is a lesson that does not have to be taught by a teacher. Teachers should be able to focus their entire attention on what they have been hired to teach. Educators are in general very moral, competent people; they are not miracle workers, parents must be substantial contributors to their child's education.

This subject will be more thoroughly examined in chapter 6.

The American education system can embark on the road to recovery with three simple steps.

Eliminate the monopoly of public schools and the Teachers Union.

Streamline our curriculum so that students spend the more time studying the most essential subjects.

Encourage parents to be more involved in their children's education so that educators can focus on educating.

### College and University Rehabilitation.

# "let the cannibal who snarls that the freedom of man's mind was needed to create an industrialized civilization, but is not needed to maintain it, be given an arrowhead and a bearskin, not a university chair of economics." Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged, Page 952

America's educational shortcomings are also pervasive in our **colleges and universities**. The biggest issue concerning colleges and universities is their rapidly rising costs compared to their continually diminishing returns.

The main reason that the cost of college has skyrocketed is the proliferation of student loans. The more loans the federal government issues the faster the tuitions rise. (This same phenomenon occurred in the housing market when the government was issuing mortgages to people who could never realistically repay them.)

While the cost of education continues to increase, there are several factors that are simultaneously lowering the value of a college education.

From a simple economics standpoint; if demand is stable, increasing the supply of any commodity (or college education) will decrease the amount of money it can demand.

The second factor which has greatly reduced the value of a college education is the proliferation of academic information on the internet. This information which was once almost the exclusive property of higher education is now available to every person with access to a computer.

# "If you can buy a self –paced calculus DVD for 67$, is it worth spending 5,000 to take the same course at a private university? Of course mutual learning that occurs in college is of value. But is it worth spending 75 times more for the same knowledge?" Steve Forbes. Dinosaur U.

The third factor which has diminished the value of a college education is the distribution of dubious degrees. If an individual can graduate with a degree which has no practical application in society, the degree has no value (beyond personal value.) A degree is only worth what it affords the person who has obtained it. Or put another way, a degree is only worth the increase in payment that one receives from having it.

Another negative consequence of dubious degrees is that they bring into question the value of all college degrees. Graduates with dubious degrees are akin to counterfeit coins of cheap metal posing as pure bullion. The more counterfeit coins that are in circulation, the more scrutiny coins of this likeness receive.

If you are nervous about this growing disparity, you have good reason to be. This student loan bubble, like all others, will burst. I believe the Federal government will devalue the dollar to prevent the majority of these students from defaulting; but that is for another book.

If America is to improve its higher education system and avoid a student loan crisis, college must become **less expensive** and **more valuable**.

### Reduce the cost of education:

The fastest way to reduce the price of education is to stop issuing federal student loans to every person who wants one. As I have illustrated, the proliferation of student loans directly increases tuition rates and decreases the value of a college education. In addition to raising the cost of tuition, student loans also curtail future liquidity from entering the economy. Every dollar that a graduate is forced to allocate to the repayment of a loan is a dollar that is confiscated from the free market.

The first step to reducing the cost of education is to limit student loans to individuals who can realistically pay them back. (The cause of the housing crisis was issuing loans to people who could not realistically repay them.)

So how do we determine who is a likely candidate to repay a loan who is likely to default? The solution is simple, look at the average salaries of individuals with certain degrees. Loans should be granted based on merit, not "need." Students with engineering degrees earn roughly double the salary of those with art history degrees. Therefore, it follows that an engineering graduate is more likely to be able to repay a loan than an art history graduate.

Just as the federal government (under the guise of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae) was terrible at determining who would be able to repay mortgages (loans on houses,) they are equally inept at determining who will be able to repay student loans. Clearly the federal government's involvement in the business of issuing loans should be restricted.

However, universities and colleges are also responsible for increasing the cost of tuition. The cost of higher education has also increased as a result of non academic expenditures. Some notable non academic expenditures include: expensive workout facilities, lavish graduation ceremonies, and garish administrative buildings. The students are forced to pay for these expenditures even if they receive no benefit from them. Higher education could reduce tuition by making non academic expenditures optional. I wonder how many students would prefer a few hundred dollars instead of a commencement speech?

### Increase the value of education:

A college education has always had value because an individual with a degree commanded higher wages than an individual without one. However, if college becomes so expensive that educational costs exceed the recompense that a graduate receives; college has become worthless as an investment.

The first step toward increasing the value of education is to decrease the cost of tuition. As tuition decreases, individuals are relieved of assuming lofty loans. The fewer loans the student has to repay, the more income he/she can enjoy. The more disposable income the individual has to enjoy, the more valuable their education was.

Another way which higher education could increase its value is by increasing the employment rate of graduates. Although it is impossible to assure that a graduate will be employed, it is possible to increase the likelihood of a graduate finding work. All graduates should have a presentable resume and a strong knowledge of which companies and industries most value the skill set which their degree has afforded them. Likewise when students chose a major they should be informed of the average salaries for graduates holding that degree. Furthermore, when students declare a major they should be provided a list of companies and industries which hire people holding the degree which they are seeking. **Not all academic pursuits yield equal financial returns and knowing that is extremely valuable information.**

In addition to reducing specious degrees, higher education could also increase its value by eliminating grade inflation. Grade inflation devalues education because employers are unable to trust the veracity of the grades which a graduate has received. The effect of grade inflation is similar to introducing counterfeit coins into a marketplace of pure bullion. Once the merchants realize that although the counterfeit coins look the same, they do not contain the same value; the merchants demand a new standard. Grade inflation has already devalued a college education so much that employers now seek graduate degrees as the new standard of academic competence.

To illuminate the current value (or lack there-of) provided by higher education, consider the actions of a student as graduation day approaches.

Most students grossly overpay to rent a graduation costume (cap and gown). Almost none of the students are aware that they are paying significantly **more** to rent something for 24 hours than it costs to own. These students do not understand simple mathematics or economics.

After drastically overpaying to rent identical costumes, the majority of students don their bizarre uniforms without ever questioning why they are wearing them. They simply do as the officials tell them to and conform to the group. These students are incapable of free thought.

The unthinking purple clad students then sit listening to a speech which they were required to fund. Most of the students are completely unaware that they funded the speech. These unaware students lack critical thinking. Other students are aware that the ceremony was funded collectively but believe that the ceremony was in the best interest of the majority. These students are unaware of the dangers of collectivism and display a grossly insufficient knowledge of history and economics.

How much value does a college education have if it culminates with men unquestionably wearing dresses which they rented for several times what they cost to buy?

Undoubtedly American education requires massive renovations to prevent our national collapse. The two most important elements in repairing our education system are increasing parental involvement and decreasing bureaucratic entanglement with education. The less parenting and politicking are teachers are forced to do, the better they will educate our children.

## Chapter 5:

## Institute Equal Protection for All Americans

# "Rights have to be granted to every citizen or to none." De Tocqueville. Democracy in America. P 66

America was founded on the concept of equal rights for all its inhabitants. This affirmation of equality is stated in the beginning of the Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Footnote:

It seems ridiculous now, but at the time when America declared its independence, equality was a concept virtually unknown throughout the world. Sadly, aside from a few short lived examples of limited democracies, humanity was historically governed by tyrannical oppression. Servitude, slavery and unthinkable cruelty were the widespread global norms.

Fortunately around 1700, European Enlightenment philosophers challenged the authority of oppression by extolling the virtue of the individual. The philosophy was quickly espoused by Colonial American leaders who felt oppressed by Britain. The most acute and moral minds of the Colonies (John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, Samuel Adams, Thomas Paine...) accepted the premise of individual liberty unconditionally and believed all people should be free. These were truly great minds who were intellectually ahead of their time.

Unfortunately, many colonial minds (George Washington, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson...) were too conditioned by the immoral historical precedent of oppression, to understand that all people deserved liberty. Although these Colonists believed that they should be free from oppression, they were so corrupted by the immoral historical precedent of slavery, that they were unable to admit its evils. Although slavery was still practiced almost everywhere in the world at this time, these great Americans are deeply flawed for supporting and participating in the most heinous act of oppression.

The Enlightened Colonial founders believed the only way to prevent American oppression (from Britain) was to form a strong alliance between all the states. Unfortunately several states with large slave populations were unwilling to join the Union if they were forced to abolish slavery. The Enlightened founders were compelled to compromise with the proponents of slavery to safeguard themselves from British oppression.

Although our Declaration of Independence did not immediately institute the equality it demanded, it provided the well crafted words that would eventually abolish slavery and champion women's suffrage. It took a few hundred years and cost countless men and women their lives, but we have finally almost achieved the equality envisioned by the enlightened founding fathers.

Now that all Americans have obtained the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; we must fight to protect those rights. In order to protect our god-given rights we must eliminate the supernatural rights of "American Aristocracy." The American Aristocracy is comprised of Americans who do not obey the same laws as everyone else.

Politicians

Professional Athletes and celebrities

The super wealthy

(Lawyers will be addressed separately at the end of this Chapter.)

These three groups (excluding the legal aristocracy) of Americans make up a tiny percentage, less than 1%, of the American people but they are the most noticeable people in America. As a result of their prominence, their actions and the consequences of those actions, are magnified. Therefore it is imperative that we hold the American Aristocracy to the same legal standard as all other American citizens.

Aside from political pitfalls, the greatest threat posed by the American Aristocracy is the corrosive effect their preferential legal treatment has on society. Each time a member of the American nobility escapes the legal consequences of their actions, the authority of the law diminishes and the morality of the nation declines.

### Politicians –

# "As the functions of central power increase, the number of officials which represent it also increases in proportion. They form a nation within a nation and, as government lends them stability, each one of them becomes more and more like an aristocracy." De Tocqueville. Democracy in America. P 791

Politicians live by a separate set of laws than all other Americans because they are exempt from liability. Consider this, if an individual willing misleads a consumer in any business; the individual can be held legally responsible. However, in politics, it is often the norm to knowingly mislead the public so as to ensure election or re-election. In order to achieve better government, we must hold politicians legally responsible for their fraudulent promises.

If a politician (or prospective politician) willingly and knowingly misleads the citizenry, the politician should be tried for fraud. Fraud is succinctly defined as, "A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain."

Fraud does not apply to subjective statements, like, "I will bring hope and change to Washington," or "I will make America a better place." Although these statements may be untrue, they are not fraudulent because they are subject to interpretation.

However, fraud should be applicable to definitive statements like, "My plan will create 100,000 new permanent jobs," or "I will not raise property taxes if I am elected." If false, these statements are fraudulent by definition because the false claims of (one individual) the politician result in a reallocation of the wealth and rights of other individuals. These declarative statements, if knowingly false, should be subject to fraud because the politician has promised **specific** returns in exchange for the vote of an individual.

If a politician wants to make declarative promises he/she should be required to provide a detailed prospectus outlining how the goals will be achieved. Just as a business needs to provide potential investors a prospectus, politicians should be required to provide voters a prospectus as well.

Political fraud should be a serious felony with serious consequences. Fraud is the most depraved form of thievery in that the thief obtains the consent of the victims through false pretenses. Fraud is particularly deplorable in that the victims are often poor, under educated, and/or elderly.

Officials convicted of political fraud should be immediately removed from office. Consequentially, the convicted official should be forced to personally fund all governmental costs associated with the special election required to elect their replacement. Additionally, a political fraud conviction should be accompanied by a lifetime ban from any form of political participation.

Beyond the political consequences, convictions for political fraud should also result in mandatory jail sentences. The minimum incarceration time should be at least the number of years the official was seeking to hold office.

If we do not prevent the spread of political fraud, America will become increasingly anarchical and consequentially, our government will become progressively tyrannical. The solution to curbing fraud in American politics is to prosecute those who perpetrate it. Political fraud is both nationally injurious and morally reprehensible, accordingly, it should be sternly penalized.

Another dishonest felony which politicians are permitted to commit is perjury. Perjury is succinctly defined as, "the willful giving of false testimony under oath."

Former President, Bill Clinton, undeniably committed perjury when he lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. (His sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky was not a crime, however lying under oath was.) Despite clearly committing the very serious crime of perjury, Bill Clinton was never held responsible.

This permission of perjury was so devastating because it was witnessed by almost every adult American. The courts were instantly undermined and a new precedent had been set; "there are no consequences to lying under oath." This new dishonest precedent was vociferously echoed by several professional baseball players who confidently lied under oath regarding steroids. Considering the seemingly nonexistent consequences, why would any criminal tell the court the truth?

When politicians escape the legal consequences of criminally dishonest actions, our laws lose legitimacy and our citizenry declines morally.

### Athletes and Celebrities–

(Sadly) Athletes and Celebrities are probably the most well known and visible people in American society. As a result of this prominence their actions are closely monitored by the public.

Most professional athletes (and some celebrities) are extremely hard working people who deserve praise for their dedication and commitment to their craft. However, the prominence of these professions should not afford them a preferential legal standard.

Despite being able to afford alternatives, the most common crime committed by professional athletes and celebrities is driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Driving under the influence is a very serious crime that kills thousands of innocent Americans each year. Unfortunately, driving under the influence is not considered a serious crime by many Americans because so many prominent individuals do it without suffering significant consequences. To maintain the prestige of our courts and increase the safety of our roads, we must uniformly prosecute impaired driving.

Here are few examples of athletes and celebrities who have escaped justice for driving while under the influence: Some of the "celebrities" names have been blocked out because I refuse to contribute to the celebrity of the worthless.

Lxxxxx Xxxxx. This worthless celeb failed field sobriety tests and later testing showed her blood alcohol level to be above the legal limit. Police also uncovered a trace amount of cocaine upon their search. Xxxxx pleaded guilty to cocaine possession and driving under the influence and was sentenced to one day in jail and 10 days community service along with three years probation. Xxxxx was released after serving 84 minutes of her sentence!

Pxxxx Xxxxxx. In September of 2006 Xxxxxx was arrested and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, which left her with a suspended license, 36 months probation and a $1,500 fine. On January 15, 2007 Xxxxxx was pulled over again for driving with a suspended license. One month later, Xxxxxx was pulled over yet again for driving 70 mph in a 30 mph zone with a suspended license! Xxxxxx was sentenced to 45 days in jail she was released 2 days later and re-sentenced to 40 days of home confinement.

Rafael Furcal played professional baseball and has been convicted of 2 DUIs. In regard to his first DUI offense, he pled ignorance as a result of being a foreigner. However, Furcal remained ignorant, and he was arrested a second time for driving 88 mph in 55 mile per hour zone with a blood alcohol level 50% above the legal limit. Hours after his second DUI arrest, Furcal was back on the ball field where he played an integral role in determining the outcome of a World Series game. Furcal was sentenced to a 21 day jail sentence that would begin AFTER the baseball season concluded!

Unfortunately high profile preferential treatment is not restricted to driving infractions. People in sports and entertainment often escape justice for the most deplorable crimes.

R. Kelly was an R&B singer who also made a sex tape with a 14 year old. The tape was then widely circulated on the internet. Despite the clear evidence of his guilt the charges against him were reduced to child pornography. Amazingly he was acquitted of all charges. He was later found in possession of child pornography of which he was AGAIN acquitted of all charges.

Jamal Lewis was a stand out running back in college and the NFL as well as an individual who plead guilty to a reduced sentence for drug trafficking. For his involvement in cocaine trafficking, Lewis was sentenced to four months in a minimum-security prison, two months in a halfway house and ordered to perform 500 hours of community service, but, because of his profession, he did not have to serve any time until after the conclusion of his NFL season.

O.J. Simpson was a former NFL star as well as the prime suspect in the murder of his wife and her friend. Despite being the prime suspect in a double murder investigation, police allowed O.J. to turn himself in. Instead he fled, and took police and the media, on a long bizarre car chase. O.J. was acquitted of the murders and was never tried for resisting arrest or any other crimes pertaining to the lengthy police chase. Soon after his acquittal for murder he was arrested for burglary.

This list could go on for pages, but the point has been proven, athletes and celebrities often escape the full legal consequences of their criminal actions.

There are several negative ramifications associated with our inability to impose justice on the American Aristocracy. When the stardom of an individual overpowers the authority of the court, the court has been corrupted and the violated law has lost some legitimacy. Every time a crime is permitted, it encourages others to follow suit. When high profile individuals commit crimes, the effects are multiplied because the public is watching.

The solution is to apply the law equally to individuals of all levels of celebrity.

### The super wealthy-

The super wealthy also receive preferential legal treatment similar to athletes and celebrities. The biggest reason that wealthy individuals often escape the consequences of their crimes is that they can afford very expensive lawyers who specialize in proving guilty people innocent. Another reason that very wealthy people receive preferential treatment is that they often have close connections to high political offices. The very wealthy Kennedy Family provides excellent examples of several different crimes which were not properly investigated. (It should be noted that the Kennedy family made its fortune through the drug trafficking of the 1930s, alcohol sales. In addition to being a major player in the illicit booze market, Joe Kennedy, the family patriarch, also allegedly had many connections to organized crime.)

In 1969, Ted Kennedy committed several crimes on a small Massachusetts island named Chappaquiddick. Not all the details are known about that night, however what is certain is that Ted Kennedy got away with several crimes, including manslaughter. The evening spiraled out of control when Kennedy asked his chauffer for his car keys, and left with a woman named Mary Jo Kopechne. Strangely, Mary Jo did not tell any of the other guests she was departing and left her purse and hotel key at the party. A car was then observed driving erratically by an off duty cop (who was able to partially identify the license plates; which later matched to Kennedy's Oldsmobile.) According to the officer, when he verbally offered to help, the vehicle speed off in a cloud of dust. The car then raced down a sandy unlit road toward a narrow bridge. Just before plunging into the pond, Kennedy's car applied the brakes, but it was too late and the car crashed into the water.

Kennedy was able to free himself from the car and swim to safety. He claims he called Mary Jo's name from the bank several times before making seven or eight attempts to swim down to the car. He then admittedly sat on the bank for about 15 minutes before returning to where the party had occurred. He denied seeing any lights on, from which he could have called police, but the owner of the nearest house insisted she he left the light on overnight. Kennedy then asked two of his friends to help him and not tell the other guests about the death. They insisted that he call the police, he insisted that he would take care of it. But Kennedy never did tell the police, instead he went home and went to sleep for a little bit. Just before 3am Kennedy complained to the hotel manager that he had been awoken by a noisy party. At 7:30 the next morning Kennedy was seen casually chatting with sailing aficionados. At 8am, Kennedy's friends from the night before angrily questioned why he had still not alerted the police. Kennedy said he had been hoping that she was okay. Kennedy then finally picked up the phone --- to ask for legal advice.

Tragically, the forensics team discovered that Mary Jo had survived for several hours trapped in an air pocket of the submerged car. She could have easily been saved had police been contacted.

Seven days after the manslaughter, Ted Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident after causing injury. Kennedy was sentenced to the statutory limit for the crime, 2 months incarceration. However, Kennedy's lawyers were able to convince the judge that Kennedy's sentence should be suspended because of his age, character, and reputation. Kennedy never suffered any legal consequences because the judge claimed that he, " **has already been, and will continue to be punished far beyond anything this court can impose**." However, Kennedy did not completely escape justice; his driver's license was suspended by the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles for 6 months (the minimum demanded for the infraction he committed.)

If you question the existence of the American aristocracy; consider how you would have been treated if you committed the same crime.

Another American Aristocrat, of the same lineage, who has escaped the legal consequences of his actions, is William Kennedy Smith. This deviant has been accused of sexual assault several times in several different states. Unfortunately, none of the convictions have ever stuck despite strong evidence. At Smith's first rape trial, 3 women provided corroborating testimony bolstering Smith's accuser; mysteriously, the testimony was considered inadmissible because the accounts were too similar. Despite the overwhelming evidence, Smith was acquitted of all charges. It must be noted that the three women, whose testimony was mysteriously inadmissible, all declined to press charges against Smith at the time of their assaults because they feared that Smith was too powerful to be convicted.

When any individual is permitted supernatural rights, the grant is inherently supported by the reduced rights of others. As Hayek believed, "with every grant of complete security to one group, the insecurity of the rest necessarily increases." P 153 To maintain the rights of all Americans we must eliminate the preferential legal treatment afforded to the American Aristocracy.

Proof of preferential treatment for the wealthy is illustrated by the existence of "white collar crime" and "white collar prisons." White collar crime was coined in 1939 by sociologist Edwin Sutherland as "a crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation." The definition is riddled with contradictions.

First, the phrase, "a crime committed by a person of respectability" is inherently contradictory because respectable individuals do not commit crimes. Second, the premise that social standing should have any bearing on a criminal act, is contrary to the concept of justice.

Here are several examples of popular white collar crimes: healthcare fraud, pharmaceutical fraud, mortgage fraud, insurance fraud, adoption scams, jury duty scams, identity theft, Ponzi schemes, money laundering and staged auto accidents. Some notable examples of recent white collar crimes are Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme and the Enron Scandal.

The common misconception is that white collar crimes have mainly financial effects. This notion is preposterous when considering the popular forms of white collar crime mentioned above.

Staged auto accidents provide an excellent example of the tangible effects of white collar crime. Here are some physical human effects to staged auto accidents:

Innocent motorists and pedestrians are unwillingly subject to death or injury.

The safety of the community is reduced because the resources of the emergency personnel are squandered on a staged accident. (A cop or ambulance can only be one place at a time.)

The community is also robbed of whatever collective costs were allocated toward the staged accident.

Staged auto accidents also deprive innocent individuals of their time because they are forced to endure unnecessary traffic. Traffic has obvious financial costs but it also has personal costs.

Consider a pregnant woman driving to the hospital.

Consider an unemployed man trying to get to a job interview on time.

Consider a student headed to meet a professor an hour before an exam.

Consider a parent headed home for child's birthday.

Consider a young child who has nightmares from witnessing the terrible crash. Consider the time that a parent has to spend assuaging the child's fear.

Consider a crane operator who is late for work. Consider the builder waiting with 50 workers who cannot begin working until the crane operator arrives. Consider the cost of the lost labor of 50 workers.

Clearly white collar crimes are not victimless. In fact, quite the contrary, white collar crimes victimize our entire society. Sentencing for these depraved predatory crimes should be granted no leniency, yet our system has created separate (more lenient) prisons for people who commit these crimes! These minimum security facilities are commonly called "white collar prisons." Although these prisons have become less plush than they were in the 1980s when they were referred to as "Club Fed," some are still separate prisons with perks like softball, ping pong, billiards, musical instruments and other comforts of freedom.

There are two reasons that "white collar prisons" exist. First, is that white collar criminals are less expensive to detain because they are generally non violent and compliant with guards. Therefore, it is economical to bundle these more manageable criminals together. The other reason white collar criminals are separated from the general population is because the prison system has a certain responsibility to protect its inmates from harm and believes that white collar criminals would be endangered by more violent criminals in the general population.

These arguments have merit, so the separation of prisoners is necessary. However, it is unjust to provide any guilty prisoner (no matter what color their collar is) the comforts of freedom. To deter the spread of white collar crime, and it is spreading rapidly, we must eliminate the unequal perks provided by minimum security prisons and consider harsher sentencing.

This disparate preferential treatment is unjust to the victims and corrosive to the morality of our nation. When a criminal escapes justice, the law loses legitimacy and our courts command less confidence.

### Lawyers-

Lawyers are part of the American aristocracy, because they have commandeered supernatural rights at the expense of the rest of the citizenry. Lawyers have granted themselves privileges since Americas inception, as de Tocqueville noted, "American Aristocracy is found at the bar and the bench." P 313.

However, just because something has long standing legal precedent does not make it right (like slavery, for example.) In fact, the legal system often interferes with natural law to protect or promote special interests. Two good examples are: Plessy vs. Fergussun (1896) which allowed for racial segregation of public facilities, and Korematsu vs. The United States (1944) which enabled FDR to imprison more than 100,000 Japanese Americans. However, for this chapter I am only concerned with the supernatural rights that lawyers have afforded themselves.

Lawyers are often wealthy so they receive the corresponding legal privileges associated with wealth. However, lawyers also have further legal privileges in that they have the ability to aid and abet criminals for profit without fear of prosecution.

Aiding and Abetting is legally defined as, "assisting another in the commission of a crime by words or conduct."

Lawyers are often guilty of aiding and abetting criminals but are protected from punishment because of their profession. The way that lawyers get around this clear violation of helping criminals commit crimes is by ensuring that they do not know with 100% accuracy that their client is guilty. However, according to this flawed logic a getaway driver at a bank robbery would be innocent unless he was explicitly told that his passengers were robbing the bank.

Lawyers, like everyone else, should have a moral responsibility to prevent criminals from committing criminal acts. The result of this moral loophole is that sleazy lawyers become rich by enabling high income criminals to get away with crimes. Every time an immoral lawyer helps a guilty man go free, all of society suffers.

Lawyers should only be allowed to represent individuals if:

They believed that the individual was innocent of the crime that he/she is accused of.

They believe that the crime committed does not warrant the charge sought.

They believe that the crime committed was justified or not a crime that the government has the right to prosecute.

They believe that some unjust procedure took place.

If a lawyer is unable to claim one of these options, they should be restricted from representing the accused. Although it would be nearly impossible to prove if a lawyer believed that their client was guilty, if a lawyer had to state, for the record, that he/she believed that their client was innocent, I think far fewer wealthy criminals would go free and more immoral lawyers would be readily shamed for accepting the blood money derived from setting guilty men free. Lawyers should have the same moral obligation and legal responsibility to prevent criminality as the rest of the citizenry.

America has come a long way in establishing the equality that our framers outlined in the Declaration of Independence. To complete the framers goal we must eliminate all preferential treatment regarding criminality. Although preferential legal treatment has been around forever, it is more dangerous and destabilizing than ever because the public has so much more access to the damning information. If we want to ensure equality and maintain social stability, we must guarantee that the American aristocrats do not receive preferential treatment.

## Chapter 6

## American Accountability and Personal Responsibility

# "The source of all of [humanity's] evils, is that nameless act which you all practice, but struggle never to admit: the act of blanking out, the willful suspension of one's consciousness, the refusal to think – not blindness, but the refusal to see; not ignorance, but the refusal to know. It is the act of unfocusing your mind and inducing an inner fog to escape the responsibility of judgment – on the unstated premise that a thing will not exist if only you refuse to identify it, that A is not A so long as you do not pronounce the verdict 'It is.' Non-thinking is an act of annihilation, a wish to negate existence, an attempt to wipe out reality. But existence exists; reality is not to be wiped out, it will merely wipe out the wiper. By refusing to say 'it is.' you are refusing to say 'I am.' By suspending your judgment, you are negating your person. When a man declares: 'who am I to know? – he is declaring: 'who am I to live?'" Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, Page 931

America became the greatest nation in the world because individuals invested everything in themselves to achieve indeterminate success. America is in decline because responsible individuals are forced to reallocate their resources from investment in themselves to investment in the irresponsible. As a result responsibility is punished and irresponsibility is subsidized.

The previous chapters have shown how bureaucracies can squander an individual's resources. However, irresponsible individuals are equally capable of squandering resources. History has proven that collectivism breeds irresponsibility and America has become increasingly collectivist. Accordingly more and more Americans invest in depreciating trivialities. Tragically, many of the worst investments are made by low income individuals. These investments are then curiously subsidized by the taxpayers.

### Tattoos:

Perhaps the most financially irresponsible of all trivialities is a tattoo. Not only do tattoos cost money to get, they have no resale value, they cost money to remove, and they actually impede the recipient from earning money.

Tattoos in general are fairly expensive. The smallest possible tattoo perhaps a heart, a poorly drawn butterfly, or the initials of a lover from a one night stand, starts at a minimum cost of $50 (however most reputable places charge more.) In general, less expensive tattoos have higher health risks and less satisfied clients. Obviously as the tattoos get larger and more complicated they become increasingly expensive. The cost of a more elaborate tattoo is a minimum of $100 dollars per hour, generally more. In addition, to get a unique tattoo there is generally a design fee of a few hundred dollars extra. So to get a unique illustration of this (5x7) book tattooed would cost anywhere from hundreds to thousands of dollars.

Tattoos also have zero resale value. (Although I morbidly predict that a tiny market for the tattoos of dead people will emerge. I believe one day a dying insolvent celebrity or athlete will auction off their skin to the highest bidder, and some loser will pay big bucks for it.) Not only do tattoos have no resale value they actually cost money to get rid of! The average cost of tattoo removal is around $100 per square inch. So to get a tattoo the size of this book removed would cost about $3500. Additionally the tattoo removal process is apparently far more painful than the initial tattoo. You would be hard pressed to think of an expense with less exchange value than a tattoo.

Finally, tattoos are actually believed to impede an individual's ability to earn an income! Although tattoos are widely accepted in certain creative industries like music, most industries perceive them as red flags. Obviously the more visible a tattoo is, the more likely it will affect one's search for employment. In general, the more visible an individual's tattoos are, the less likely that individual has of finding a job.

Tattoos are about as bad of a return as one can get on their money. Can you think of anything more wasteful to purchase than something with no exchange value, that costs money to get rid of, and prevents the recipient from getting a job? Yet considering all this, roughly 40% of Americans between 25 and 40 years old invest in a tattoo. And what is worse, is that responsible tax payers are forced to subsidize this regressive behavior by paying for their existing (or impending) unemployment.

### Electronics, Clothes and Cars.

A certain amount of connectivity is needed to advance in today's world. However most people do not need a brand new computer or cellular phone to stay connected. New gadgets depreciate very rapidly because technology is always advancing. In fact, some expensive gadgets become almost worthless within a few months (mini discs, PDAs.) Sadly, many lower income Americans spend a disproportionate amount of their income on these electronic whims.

Another way that people waste money on electronics is by purchasing top of the line name brand gadgetry, when all they need is basic equipment. Consider all the people with expensive, name brand computers who use their computer almost exclusively for browsing the internet and word processing. Americans could save lots of money by becoming better informed shoppers and by purchasing overstocked items.

### Clothes, shoes and accessories:

Clothes and shoes are similar to electronics in that there is a certain amount of money that one needs to spend on clothing to succeed at a job and attract a mate. (Correction: women can easily attract a mate without any clothes.) Beyond those utilitarian purposes, clothes and shoes are a bad investment because they usually have little to no resale value.

Having clean, presentable clothes is an integral factor in presenting a positive first impression. The clothes do not need to be expensive, they just need to look appropriate for the occasion. When an individual presents themselves well, regardless of the price of their outfit, they are afforded more opportunities.

Clearly clothes that provide individuals more opportunities, are a great investment. However, many clothing expenditures are wasteful. Many Americans insist upon buying designer goods when all they need are basic clothes. Some good examples of common wasteful American expenditures are "bedazzeled" designer T-shirts for $100 or sneakers for $200.

Accessories, like watches or jewelry are another investment that generally has a low rate of return. Jewelry generally depreciates, unless it is made by a famous artist, so its value is mainly value in use. Now consider what is the use of jewelry? Jewelry has very little value in terms of business facilitation, so its main value is derived from the enjoyment of ownership. Enjoyment is subjective so determining value is conditional, but to me, jewelry is a wasteful expenditure because it provides no opportunities for further wealth creation and generally depreciates.

### Cars:

For many Americans cars are a necessary part of life. However, many Americans squander an unnecessary amount of income on automobiles. There are two primary ways that Americans squander money on cars.

New cars directly from the dealership depreciate drastically the minute the car drives off the lot. In general a car loses more than 15% of its value as soon as it is sold from the dealership! So unless you are willing to pay a few thousand dollars extra, you would be far better served getting a slightly used car.

Another way that Americans waste money on vehicles is by purchasing automobiles that do not suit their needs. The most common mistake that uneducated consumers make, is buying a car that is too expensive for their budget. There are two ways that people overspend on vehicles. First, some uneducated consumers pay more to purchase a car than they can realistically afford.

However, most car buyers end up squandering their resources on the unconsidered costs associated with a vehicle. According to AAA, the cost per mile to drive a small sedan is roughly 44.9 cents whereas the cost of a large sedan is 75.5 cents per mile and an SUV is roughly 75.7 cents per mile. The average American drives about 15000 miles per year, so the average **yearly** savings of owning a small sedan versus an SUV are over $4500! Now consider that the average American holds on to a car for 6 years (71.4 months,) that means that by simply choosing an efficient car the buyer will save an average of roughly $25,000.

Unfortunately advertising and celebrity worship have convinced many impoverished Americans that they need to drastically overpay for whatever is fashionable. Americans could save lots of money simply by thinking for themselves.

### Credit and Credit Cards:

# "The man who borrows in order to spend will soon be ruined, and he who lends to him will generally have occasion to repent of his folly." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations. P 244

The reason that so many Americans have trouble with their finances is that they have been granted almost unlimited credit. (The American individual financial problem is a microcosm of our national problem; purchasing goods and services that we can't afford.) Historically, individuals have had to be able to afford all the goods and services that they wanted to purchase. As Adam Smith stated,

# "It is not because one man keeps a coach while his neighbour walks a-foot, that the one is rich and the other poor; but because the one is rich he keeps a coach, and because the other is poor he walks a-foot." Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations P 64

However, Smith proposed this before the advent of virtually unlimited credit, which has partially reversed his theory. Credit has always existed, however credit without realistic expectation of repayment, is a new phenomenon. Perhaps if Adam Smith were to comment on our present situation he would revise his comment to something like:

# It is now common that one man becomes poor because he keeps an expensive coach while another man becomes rich because he walks afoot.

The individual who makes purchases beyond their means with credit (and has no plan of repayment) will likely become poor. The danger with unchecked credit is that it allows irresponsible individuals to purchase more goods or services than they can realistically afford. (This was the cause of the housing collapse and will be the cause of the impending student loan debacle.)

Consider all the irresponsible athletes who are completely broke despite earning in excess of 100 million dollars! Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield, Scottie Pippen, Antwan Walker, Allen Iverson, Michael Vick, Stephon Marbury. Sadly, these athletes are not the exception, they are the norm. Despite earning millions of dollars, Sports Illustrated uncovered that 78% of NFL players, and 60% of NBA players, are bankrupt or under financial distress within 5 years of retirement. What all of these athletes have in common is that they purchased more goods and services than they were realistically able to afford.

Common people (non millionaires) can also be adversely affected by the pitfalls of limitless credit. The proliferation of credit cards has allowed irresponsible individuals to purchase extravagances that they realistically cannot afford. Thus credit creates the illusion of wealth, when in reality it is often the fastest way to achieve financial ruin through insurmountable debt.

Using cash for most purchases makes managing a budget much easier. Consider two strangers at the grocery store buying dinner; one man uses cash only, the other makes all his purchases with credit. The man who uses cash left his house with a 20 dollar bill and cannot spend more than that amount. He buys only what he needs, and makes sure he pays the lowest price that he can find.

The man who relies on credit has his credit card and has no idea of how much he will spend at the grocery store. He does not scrutinize the prices and purchases more than he desires.

When the two shoppers exit the store the man who paid with cash will be under budget and will have saved those extra funds for whatever long term investments he desires. The man who paid with credit will have spent more than he needed to and will therefore have less to invest in his future.

Credit obviously has tremendous benefits, but should not be used to purchase irresponsible whims.

### The economics of personal health:

Many Americans also waste a ton on money simply by being unhealthy. Just as owning an inefficient automobile costs more to maintain, so does maintaining an unhealthy body. Sadly, many Americans are unhealthy, not because of natural factors, but because they have habitually made bad choices.

The most expansive self induced, health problem facing Americans today is obesity (and to a lesser extent being overweight.) Roughly, 66% of Americans are considered overweight and about 33% are considered obese. An individual is considered overweight by having a body mass index of 25%, likewise an individual is considered obese by having a body mass index above 30%.

The ramifications of this largely self induced affliction are devastating and enumerable.

Being overweight increases the likelihood of the following serious medical conditions: heart disease, heart attack, strokes, type 2 diabetes, increased risk of certain cancers, hypertension, and alzheimer's disease. Aside from the increased chance of premature death, the financial consequences of being overweight are never ending.

The most obvious increased financial cost related to obesity is the increased cost of healthcare and medical services. According to the CDC, the average obese American annually pays at least $2000 more for medical care than a individual with a healthy body mass index.

However there are several indirect costs associated with being overweight. Being overweight is a detriment to employment. Employers are less likely to hire obese individuals because they tend to be less productive workers who miss more time from work due to medical issues. Even when overweight individuals are hired, they tend to earn less than their thin coworkers. On average obese people earn $1.25 less per hour than their thinner colleagues; over a forty year career the total loss of earnings exceeds $100,000!

Not only do overweight people earn less, they also cost more to maintain on a daily basis. The heavier something is the more energy is required to move it, humans are no exception. Therefore heavier Americans cost more to transport. One study showed that the average overweight individual requires 9 more gallons of gas to transport their vehicle than a person with a healthy body mass index. Similarly airplanes are also adversely effected by the increased passenger weight loads. The increase in passenger weight is estimated to require an additional 275 million gallons of jet fuel per year.

It is impossible to definitively quantify the cost of being overweight but The Real Cost of Living: Making the Best Choices for You, Your Life, and Your Money  _by Carmen Wong Ulrich,_ provides an excellent possibility.

# "Add together the higher annual costs of healthcare and medication ($1,429), wage discrimination ($2,500), travel costs (a conservative $25), and other lifestyle costs such as mobility and clothing ($2,500), and the cost of being overweight is around $6,454 a year, or that's $538 a month. Over a lifetime (forty adult years), that's more than $258,000. And had you instead put that $538 a month in your retirement account, earning a moderate average of 6 percent interest, you'd have $1,082,675. But that's without diabetes or complications. Consider those pricey add-ons, and you're looking at $19,454 a year in total costs—that's $778,160 over a lifetime and over $3 million if that money had been invested."

However, obesity also has devastating human consequence including lowering an individual's life expectancy and quality of life.

### Smoking:

Another largely preventable American health problem is smoking related illness. It has long been known that smoking negatively effects humans, yet according to the CDC, 19.3% of Americans adults still smoke.

The obvious cost of cigarettes is whatever the vendor charges. The national average is roughly $5 per pack (although in New York it is more than double that.) That means the average American smoker, who smokes a pack a day, will spend about $1825 dollars per year on cigarettes. In New York a smoker would pay over $4000 a year just for cigarettes!

In addition to paying thousands of dollars for cigarettes, smokers also average significantly higher medical expenses. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, American smokers spend considerably more than $3,000 more than non smokers for healthcare costs. This is because smokers are more likely to suffer serious health conditions. Smoking also increases dental bills and over the counter medical expenditures.

In addition, to serious health concerns smoking is also a deterrent for employers. One reason that employers are reluctant to hire smokers is that they usually cost more to insure. Another reason employers are adverse to hiring smokers is that they tend to take smoke breaks. Over time smoke breaks add up and cost employers thousands of dollars a year.

Another unforeseen cost of smoking is that it lowers the value of your most costly assets, your car and your house. A San Diego State University study showed that the resale value of smoker's car was about 9% less than a non smoker's. Similarly, most prospective home buyers will not purchase a house that smells like smoke. The cost of deodorizing a home can be thousands of dollars. Additionally, less valuable items, like clothes and furniture, are also negatively affected by smoke. In general, almost all smoker's goods depreciate as a result of smoke damage.

When considering all the costs of smoking, it is a very expensive and dangerous habit. Including all the indirect costs associated with smoking, the average smoker spends more than $5,000 dollars a year more than a non smoker.

### Another resource that many Americans squander is time.

# "If time be of all things the most precious, wasting time must be the greatest prodigality." Ben Franklin.

Many Americans squander their time by being unproductive. All individuals require a certain amount of time to relax, but many Americans are consumed by the irrelevant.

Television consumes the majority of American leisure time. The average American spends more than 2.5 hours a day watching television! That is more than 912 hours of TV watching per year! That means that the average American spends more than 38 full days (24 hour days) watching TV! Working 8 hours a day, it would take 114 days to complete 912 hours! If an individual were to work at minimum wage ($7.25) instead of watching television, the individual would earn roughly $6,600 more per year! Additionally, the cost of the physical television and basic cable is roughly $1,000 per year.

Americans also waste lots of time on the internet. Although the internet has wonderful applications, many people use it to watch pornography, worship celebrities, waste time "networking," watch videos of people getting hit in the groin, or study NCAA football rankings. All of these activities add up to hundreds of lost hours per year. The average social networking user spends more than 100 hours a year "networking." That is more than 4 full (24 hour) days a year! 100 hours is also equal to 2.5 weeks of full time employment. That means an individual could earn more than $700 dollars a year by replacing social networking with a part time minimum wage job. Simply by wasting less time on the internet, individuals can provide themselves hundreds of newfound hours which they can use to earn thousands of dollars.

Americans also like to waste time and money watching big screens and playing video games. The average American goes to the cinema about 5 times per year, 2nd most in the world to Icelanders. Americans also play lots of video games. More than 50% of adults play video games and more than 20% of adults play video games every day. Although some leisure is necessary, many Americans seem to be expert at doing nothing.

When the total yearly cost of irresponsibility is totaled the sum is staggering.

Inefficient car $4500, + Being overweight $6500, \+ Smoking $5000, + Watching TV $7600, + Social networking $750 = $24,350 of squandered resources per year. Clearly many Americans could save thousands of dollars by simply being more responsible.

Another tremendous financial strain provided by irresponsibility is that which is created by irresponsible parents. Irresponsible parents have children who they cannot financially or emotionally support and thus leave the burden to the community. Having a child that cannot be properly cared for is one of the most abusive and irresponsible actions that a human can make; yet our government subsidizes it. (Although there are certain circumstances where a single parent should get some assistance like, if a parent is dead, but women should not get money for being irresponsible.) If we want to stop the destruction of the family we have to stop incentivizing single parents. Children are largely molded by their parents and irresponsible parents will often produce irresponsible children. The more we promote irresponsibility, the faster our nation will decline.

If Americans simply start acting productively and responsibly there will be more than enough resources for everyone.

Beyond being responsible for how we allocate our personal resources, it is also important to be accountable to whom we allocate our resources. To promote responsibility and prevent insolvency we (the almighty consumers) must start depriving all irresponsible entities of all funding. If the bodies elected to govern do not hold corporations responsible for their actions, the consumers must.

If you believe a corporation to be immoral, withhold all funds from them. If you believe that a media outlet is trying to destroy America, boycott it and all the companies that advertise there. Likewise, if a TV show promotes disgusting immoral values, do not support it or the companies that advertise there. If your local sports team hires scumbags athletes who drive while intoxicated and beat women, stop supporting anything to do with the franchise. If a film benefits anti-American celebrities or producers, do not see the film. If your government is wasteful; support a responsible candidate and withhold as much of your earnings as you legally can.

Beyond allocating personal resources more pointedly, individuals can make America a better place simply by being more considerate. Driving while intoxicated is completely unacceptable as it kills in excess of 10,000 Americans every year, accounting for more than 30% of all driving related fatalities. Far more Americans die from drunk driving accidents than in wars ever year. In fact, the average annual number of deaths from drunk driving, exceeds the number of Americans killed in all foreign combat since 2001. And it is completely preventable.

Another danger posed by inconsideration is the insistence of individuals to text and use cellular phones while driving. This offensive habit is believed to be roughly as dangerous as drinking and driving, yet many drivers do it habitually. Although individuals know that this behavior is dangerous, they feel entitled to do it at the expense of all the other drivers.

The government has played a large part in creating an uneducated and irresponsible population who believes that they are entitled to whatever they desire. If individuals do not become more aware and involved with protecting America's founding principles, this cancerous culture of irresponsible entitlement will spread until it is so extensive that no dissidence will be permitted.

Individual Americans pursuing their own interests is what created the wealth of our great nation. However, imprudent investments will destroy a fortune of any size. In order to preserve our individual freedom and our national wealth, we must invest as many dollars as possible in our own individual passions and pursuits. If citizens are forced to redistribute our earnings to irresponsible or inefficient causes, we will become impoverished as individuals and as a nation. The best way to preserve American prosperity is to preserve individual liberty by fighting back any expansion of government powers.

## Conclusion

# "Evil Triumphs when good men do nothing." Edmund Burke.

America became the greatest nation in the world because our free market economy rewarded ingenuity, industriousness, and responsibility. This freedom of individual pursuit generated our superior national wealth and afforded our citizenry the highest standard of living in the world. Inexplicably, America is increasingly adapting the ruinous collectivist policies that have destroyed other potentially great nations. If we are to maintain our position as the most prosperous nation in the world, we must preserve and protect the individual freedoms outlined in our constitution.

Although there are many problems facing America, the majority of our national problems are attributable to the expansion of governmental authority or " **governmental obesity**." Governmental obesity is such an apt term because of all the hidden (indirect) costs associated with the increase in size. Just as it requires more resources to sustain an obese person; it requires more resources to sustain an expanded government.

The direct cost of paying unneeded government workers is painful, however, the indirect costs associated with expanded government are nationally crippling.

One indirect cost of expanded bureaucracy is that it entangles business and government, which is always at the expense of the consumers and citizens. When business and government are entangled both parties suffer. Businesses suffer because they are forced to compete against the government, which has superior resources and can provide itself unfair advantages. Conversely, government also suffers from this entanglement because it experiences an increased risk of corruption and negative exposure. The longer business and government are entangled, the more certain it is that they will become corrupted.

Additionally, when government oozes into private enterprise, innovation and wealth creation are stifled. Every unnecessary tax and regulation results in a direct loss of resources that an individual can invest in themselves. The resources that the individual would have allocated toward their own needs and pursuits are now redirected toward the ambitions of the government. The result is a contraction of goods and services and a nationally diminished standard of living.

The most crippling effect of expanded government is that it diminishes individual responsibility. This is the most devastating effect because the less responsible an individual is the less able they are to govern themselves. Therefore as citizens become increasingly irresponsible, government expansion accelerates accordingly. (This is "The Road to Serfdom" that Hayek predicted.) Government expansion creates a perpetual cycle which increases government authority and decreases individual freedoms. As the majority of citizens become docile and dependant on the government, the citizenry will implement a "tyranny of the majority" in which all individual pursuits will be subservient to the collective ambition.

It must be noted, the most abhorrent atrocities in history were all committed by governments under the guise of the collective good; whereas the vast majority of humanity's greatest achievements were products of individual pursuits.

The government has promoted an uneducated and irresponsible population who believes that they are entitled to whatever they desire. If the citizens do not become aware of the greatness afforded by individualism, this cancerous culture of irresponsible entitlement will metastasize until our great nation becomes unrecognizable.

The best way to prevent America's collapse, is to adopt more of the free market policies which have generated so much of our national success. There is not one specific reason that America is declining, however the common corrosive theme is growing government and shrinking personal responsibility. We need to improve many things in America: Our Government, our education system, our infrastructure, our legal system, our prison systems, our energy policies... **However, none of these changes are possible without individuals taking action**.

If we do not sacrifice some of our free time now to secure our future freedom, we will have no free time at all and no freedom left to secure. **To save America we must become more involved citizens**. We must vote for better candidates, run for governmental offices, and convince uneducated people of the evils of collectivism.

# [The only way to protect freedom is] if we awake to the threat that we face, only if we persuade our fellow men that free institutions offer surer, if perhaps at times a slower, route to the ends they seek than the coercive power of the state." Milton Friedman. Capitalism and Freedom. P. 202

The most dangerous threat facing America is not Russia, China, or terrorism; it is the incursion of our own government into individual liberties. If government continues to usurp individual authority, our citizens will suffer increased oppression and a diminished standard of living.

Go save America before it is too late; you are the only person who can! Protect your rights and the rights of your children! Believe in yourself and the self interest of your fellow citizens.

~ ~ ~

## Bibliography

Smith, Adam. The Wealth of Nations.

Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom.

Publius (aka: Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison.)The Federalist Papers

De Tocqueville, Alexis. Democracy in America.

Hayek, F.A. The Road to Serfdom.

Rand, Ayn. The Fountainhead.

Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged.

Caplan, Bryan. The Myth of the Rational Voter

Browne, Harry. How you can Profit from the Devaluation of the Dollar.

Paine, Thomas. Common Sense.

Paine, Thomas. The Age of Reason.

Schlaes, Amity. The Forgotten Man.

Clason, George. The Richest Man in Town.

Friedman, George. The Next Decade.

Lewis, Michael. The Big Short.

Wong-Ulrich, Carmen, The Real Cost of Living: Making the Best Choices for You, Your Life, and Your Money.

Huber, Peter. The Bottomless Well.

Muller, Richard. Physics for Future Presidents.

In addition, I must also give credit to the City Journal, The Economist, Forbes Magazine. Cranes Magazine.

