Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Workfare v. Welfare

We would agree that it is best when employment comes about through the private sector (preferably domestic as opposed to foreign). The hard case occurs when private corporatists are sitting on large quantities of money and are unwilling or undesirous of using such stashes to create more jobs or to hire more employees. Once they are that loaded, what's their incentive? Especially if, because of their successful lobbying, much of the tax revenue to pay the people out of work and on welfare comes from the middle class. How could mere tax cuts or gov spending cuts entice them to create more jobs if they are already loaded and unwilling themselves to create more jobs?

The Laffer Curve pertains to a sweet spot for tax cuts. Outside the sweet spot, it does not prescribe more tax cuts as a panacea. So long as the oligarchy is content to sit on its largess, I don't see how cutting taxes or welfare can create more jobs. Especially when the Oligarchy already has access to abundant cheap labor, illegal cheap labor, and foreign cheap labor.

More likely, cutting taxes and welfare in such a situation would lead to even cheaper labor, even greater chasm between the middle class and the Oligarchy, and even more buying and selling of political influence by the Oligarchy. To the greater destruction of the representative republic.

In this situation, switching from using tax revenue for workfare instead of for welfare may be one of the few ways to get more people working, more productive bang for the buck, and more political will to preserve the republic.

IAE, there is danger in the Oligarchy having such large stashes, with less job creation (productive work) in which to invest. For one thing, it is hard for a financial system to manage such a situation. If Oligarchs were to begin chasing fewer goods with more money, that could set off runaway inflation. If Oligarchs use their financial stashes instead to buy political influence, that would likely soon destroy what remains of the representative republic. Which would return us to the default system of serfdom.

I don't think the answer can always be cutting taxes, cutting spending, or cutting workfare. I think the situational flux calls for something more than purely linear thinking.


I indicated gov spending needs to be, and can be, moved closer to production. To say it cannot would translate into saying no change in gov spending, up or down, will affect net production.
I think that is false. To employ more people in workfare, rather than welfare, will tend to increase net production - - - unless the workfare is pulling people from private work instead of from welfare.
I don't see how that can be controversial.
Would you rather the gov get in the road making business by directly hiring every road worker, or would you rather the gov take bids, hire a prime contractor, and let him hire and fire the subs? Note: Various gov contracts can be perpetual, long term, cyclical, or site/time limited.
I suspect you would find hiring a prime, low bidding contractor, with incentives for early performance, to tend to get you more production for the buck. IOW, it would tend to move spending closer to production. In many cases, the improved infrastructure will then enhance productive capacities of private users.

The reality is, there will be a social safety net. Net, not hammock
The reality is, workfare is better, generally, than welfare. Transfer a lot of welfare money to workfare money. To pay private contractors to work on infrastructure. Not to simulate the economy, but to cure the entitlement mindset.
The reality is, as more jobs are taken by machines, such stopgap measures will be unavoidable. The alternative, to pay people for breathing, is too destructive to human freedom and dignity.
The reality is, this needs to be accompanied by incentives to reduce population.


When welfare is tied to real work, more people will seek private employment.
I agree that jobs where employees work directly for the gov need to be reduced. Both in pay and in numbers.


Spending may be more palatable if it were more closely tied to getting people back to productive work.

The fear is less of immigrants than of the oligarchy (with which the Pope is complicit) that wants to push immigration by liberty-illiterates in order to destroy every representative republic that facilitates human freedom and dignity above the people farm. And it is less fear than righteous anger


The genesis behind Agenda 21?  http://golden-dawn-international-newsroom.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-genocide-of.html
It is clear that those that want to farm people and those that want to be farmed have made an unholy alliance (of lions and hyenas?), by which they mean to subjugate everyone else.  Freedom and dignity for individuals is to be destroyed.  This is undeniable to anyone who looks at immigration policies, meant to drown every representative republic under onslaughts of liberty-illiterates.
This is why the Establishment of Corporatists and Oligarchs hates Trump and will do whatever it deems necessary to destroy him.  This is why his opponents are an alliance of corrupti and ignoranti, posing as "Progressives" and "Liberals."  They are liars.  There is nothing progressive, liberty-affirming, humane, or decent about these people-farming scum-suckers.  They are at war with every representative republic, and every representative republic that fails to see that is doomed.
The people-farming model is a monstrous amalgamation of Orwell's stick, Huxley's carrot, Marx's delusions, and Mohammad's evil.  Every decent person who opposes that evil amalgamation of pervs, perps, pueriles, pedophiles, profs, parasites, and people-farmers is castigated by the Oligarchy and its Oz Monkeys as "racist."

We need more Jews (perhaps especially among non-religiously affiliated Jews) to lose the hyphenation and focus on being great Americans. If they aren't religious, why subjugate the American Ideal to a law-drooling NWO nightmare of sheeple-regulation that masquerades as utopia?

Perhaps, instead of race, people could communicate about subjectively reinforced Social Affinities based on Superficial appearances ("SAS"). It may make more sense to consider people as SAS-ists than as racists.
What we have now is hypocrisy multiplied into un-sanity, so that light complexioned people (especially if male and coming from Germany) can be racists, but not dark complexioned people (even if they shout, Kill Whitey!).
Racism seems to be a construct that Marxists, Progs, and Free Stuff Mongers find so useful that they will not easily give it up.


We have been ruled by oligarchic shenanigans as far back as I can remember. Trump is the first and only President that might not be sold out to the oligarchy. So, this person quits. Why? The clear implication is that he served the oligarchy, not the American Ideal.
Eisenhower warned (belatedly) about the "danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite": (IOW, oligarchy.)
In a nutshell, that precisely expresses what the uniparty of rino-dinos -- aided by the CIA -- wants to accomplish: To erase national borders and to establish an open society of NWO enserfment for the cheap-laboring masses. Proggies want to trade their human freedom and dignity for the security of a serf. They imagine that will promote fairness and equality. And the CIA helps to brand all who oppose as "white supremacists" or anti-Semites, or some such other shitty little trickery.


So, how many nations, cultures, elections (foreign and domestic) has the CIA, by subterfuge, destabilized, redirected, or replaced?
How responsive are the CIA, its higher officers, friendly politicians, and the Presidency, to the wishes of pay-to-play corporatists and oligarchs (domestic and international)?
Why is the CIA stirred to dislike Trump: is it related to the dislike of Trump by pay-to-play Establishmentarians who feel they're not getting what they're accustomed to paying for?
How loyal is the run of the mill CIA analyst to the American Ideal (which entails a representative republic under a system of checks and balances and separation of powers, as opposed to a ruling oligarchy)?
How many analysts see their purpose as being to push progress to an open society, borderless, NWO?
Why do you begrudge the ideal of making America great?

What I hate is the ignorant and corrupt (law drooling) destruction of the representative republic.

The cause of the darkness is rampant non-receptivity to the Source of spirituality, morality, direct intuition, and interconnecting empathy. And the giving over of all reason and morality to a scientism that has no capacity to derive "ought from is." The consequence is the floating of oligarchic crap to farm the people as if they were of no more worth than cattle. Evil flows and agglomerates from self-godding as surely as water flows downhill. Hedonists with no faith higher than pleasure naturally fall for and flock to lying, false-promising, bribing Oligarchs. The Uniparty of Rinos and Dinos is a tale as old as agriculture, although it has been called by different names throughout the ages.


The news media are the klowns. But the only ones laughing are the P's. The pervs, perps, profs, pueriles, pushers, parasites, pedophiles, and people farmers. All the "best" people. S/
Too bad for them they weren't quite fast enough to capsize the republic. Not that they didn't try, bless their hearts.


I agree with Limbaugh, that the media (whores for the Oligarchy) that did not make Trump cannot break Trump.
If a Hitler comparison is to be made, it should be made more against the Oligarchy. The Oligarchy controls the media/academia, spreads division and disinformation, relentlessly repeats big lies, ridicules the values of ordinary Americans, incites thugs and looters and Oz monkeys, benefits by farming the masses, is willing to sacrifice untold numbers to feed its pleasures, taxes the people to "educate" useful idiots, and works to erase the borders and overturn the demography with Liberty-Illiterates and Hyphenates.
Ordinary Americans see all this! They will not turn against Trump so long as he opposes the fascist Oligarchy and seeks to reduce their grip on America in order to restore the separation of powers as envisioned by the Founders.
EDIT: Hitler was a despotic people farmer. He had no respect for the freedom or dignity of the masses. That is precisely what the ruling godless, god-mucked, self-godded oligarchy wants to be: People farmers.
Their role model is not Jesus. Their role model is an ugly amalgamation of Hitler-Stalin-Mao-Mohammad-BigBrother-MustaphaMond.


There's no fool like a person educated into foolery. A plain fool can learn. But a person educated into foolery is invested in it. Their "education" insulates them from common sense. For awhile, some may even become so adept in intellectually dishonest mental gymnastics that they become accomplished in superficial IQ tests. Fortunately, when they reach 40, more of them start to regain acquaintance with common sense. Likely, the ones that remain "liberals" after age 40 tend to be stupid --- both in IQ and in common sense.


    No comments: