Random Firings of Neurons

The rest of your life is going to be spent getting back up after life has knocked you down again. You might as well just get used to it.

My Photo
Location: Round Rock, Texas, United States

Saturday, August 14, 2004

On state's rights

Since I was asked to delve a little deeper into the concept of "state's rights", I will. Today, we will be talking about Federal funding of anything, and how that violates the rights of states, and the citizens of those states.

Nowhere in the US Constitution is Congress authorized to spend ANY citizen's money on another citizen, or for another citizen's benefit. Congress is only authorized to spend money on the benefit of the nation, and country, as a whole. Not for part of the citizenry, but for all of the citizenry. So, since the military and Interstate system benefit ALL Americans, Congress can authorize spending. AIDS research, not so much.

You see, Federal funding of disease research only benefits the few people who have to live with the disease. Not those of us who don't have that disease. So, Federal funding is NOT Constitutionally authorized. Since I am in the lowest possible risk factor for AIDS (heterosexual male, non-IV drug user, non-sexually active, non-hemophiliac, no recent surgeries, and no surgeries planned), money spent on AIDS research does not benefit me in the slightest. In fact, it has a negative effect on my welfare, as my share of tax-dollars spent on AIDS research could be better spent BY me, ON me. Any money I spend goes into the tax system, thereby enhancing the Federal budget, rather than taking away from my ability to spend, which decreases the Federal budget.

Oh, a quick aside here on some basic economics. Government employees cannot pay taxes. It's impossible for them to do so. A Federal employee CAN pay SOME state taxes, and a state employee can pay SOME Federal taxes (less Federal taxes than you would think, since most states receive Federal funding, but the Federal government doesn't receive as much back from the states), but a state employee cannot pay ANY state taxes, in any way, shape or form. A government employee is paid out of tax revenue. A government employee then gives some of their wages back to the government, as "taxes". To explain this in a different way, if I gave you $100, but asked for $25 back, to pay me for the ability to pay you, you would only get $75. Who cares how long you held on to it. You still only received $75 from me. And then I'm going to ask you for more of that money back, to help me pay you. Ponzi's name is still reviled for a scheme like this. And some morons in this country elect politicians who make Ponzi look like an amatuer. Sad, really.

Anyway, since I, and actually the majority of Americans, do not gain ANY benefit from AIDS research, it is a violation of the Constitution to require us to pay for it.

By the way, I am not opposed, in the SLIGHTEST, to research into a cure for AIDS. I am just opposed to me, and other Americans, being REQUIRED to fund research into AIDS, or any other disease, for that matter. It just so happens that there is a real cheap preventative measure for AIDS: it's called "abstinence". Also, no hypodermic needles outside of a medical facility is a good thought, also. But I digress.

An even greater Constitutional debacle is the Department of Education. If the Founding Fathers were all Hell-bent on education being a Federal issue, they would have created a Department of Education in the US Consitution. But, since they didn't, we now get to look at those pesky Ninth and Tenth Amendments again, to see what they felt. That's right. They left it up to the states. You seeing a pattern, on how our government is supposed to be administered, yet?

I guess the most concise way I could state this would be to say that just about anything that isn't specifically authorized as an expenditure in the US Constitution is a matter that the Founding Father's wanted to be left up to the states. Want funding for the Disease du Jour? Get it from the state you live in. Or, better yet, get some private citizens to pay for it. Want welfare? Convince your neighbors to pay for it, not the citizens in another state. Nowhere in the Constitution is taking money from one citizen to GIVE it to another citizen authorized. And that's all Federal funding of research and "safety nets" and education is: legalized theft. Because I personally have not benefited one iota from the Department of Education, and neither has any other American. Welfare has been a boondoggle since it's inception, and is just you and I paying for someone else's misfortunes. And Federal research money is just theft, plain and simple.

Now, don't get me wrong. I have no problem with those things being funded. BUT, not with MY money, AGAINST my will. If I want to send money to an organisation that does research into curing a disease, let me make that decision. If the state I live in wants to fund that research, I can always move to another state. If a person doesn't want to be educated, no amount of money from the Feds will help them. Now, I'm just funding an expensive ignoramus. And if I want to help those who are down on their luck, let me do it with my own money. Direct contributions have no management fees, and I can place whatever stipulation on the money I want. (I personally don't place stipulations on my aid, but I also don't have much money FOR aid, due to obscene taxes, and all those people getting MY money without my consent already) In all of these cases, the state I live in can stipulate that money will be spent on those issues, and, if I don't like it, I can move. Which, truth be told, I am. Mainly because of the money that is being taken out of MY wallet, to pay for things I do not use, nor will I ever use. (Just so y'all know, I have been fired more times than I care to discuss, and the only time I have EVER even APPLIED for unemployment was when I was laid off due to winter...I was goin back to the job in the spring, and just needed the money to pay my bills until I reported back to work. Otherwise, I won't collect unemployment. Ever.)

On a final note, and as another aside, one of the ways that Federal funding in minimized in the eyes of the electorate is the mythical "dollars per taxpayer". You see, 10% of the population pays 75% of the taxes. So, I can't possibly be paying "my fair share" of any Federal research grant, since I don't make enough money to be in that top 10%. The bottom 50% of taxpayers pay less than 5% of the taxes, so they pay even less than I do. So, it is a relatively (and I do mean "relatively", since the top 10% make over $75,000/year...not all that much, when you think about it) small percentage of people who are funding ALL of the programs in America, if you consider that the bottom 90% don't even pay enough in taxes to fund the neccessities, like Federal road projects, or the military. And since that top 10% could be putting their money to more EFFICIENT use funding those programs themselves, it doesn't make any sense to make them pay for programs that they most likely don't need. But, hey, that's just me. I like it when my boss has more money. It means I'm getting a raise soon.

Semper Fidelis: Always Faithful, to God, Corps and Country