In the previous post (below) I provide a simplified version of what happened to the Stock Markets and Financial Industry. The reason everyone needs to understand this now is because the same thing is happening in governments. In order to stave off the problems this has brought to the markets, and thereby every major company that relies on these markets, governments are incurring large debts with no thought of their future ability to pay.
Pretend that you have credit card and car loan balances totaling $50,000. Also pretend that your house is worth $200,000, and you only owe $100,000. As long as you are paying your bills, you are a good credit rating and can get credit if you need it. You know you can refinance your house, if necessary, for money to pay off your obligations. But, what happens to you if the value of your home drops to $100,000? Now your ability to pay is reduced through no fault of your own, even if your income is the same.
Let's assume that you don't currently rely on debt for the day to day business of your home. But, if your car breaks down or you have a non-routine medical expense you no longer have the ability to get the cash you need to meet your obligations. You can ask your boss for a raise, but this minor increase in your income cannot help you to pay off the large obligations that are dragging down your credit rating. With this new obligation, your ability to pay your other existing obligations is further diminished. Due to your diminished ability to pay, your credit cards are closed by the banks and your interest rate goes up. You no longer have access to any funds other than the income from your job. As long as your income holds, and you don't have any unplanned expenses, you may be able to hold on. But, consider that the change has affected many others. This could easily impact your employer, and your income.
Now, simply assume that you are the government. It works exactly the same. When the ability of your government to acquire capital is reduced, all of the existing debt becomes a greater burden. The government can raise taxes, but there is not enough money in the system to pay off the debt enough to improve our credit rating. It will have to reduce its expenses. Not only that, in a recession, overall income is reduced. This means that less tax money will be collected, even if the rate is increased.
Every person in America needs to reduce their expenses now. You can stop spending on discretionary purchases and obligations (cell phones, cable, etc) while it is still an option. You cannot stop spending on debt. You don't want that to be all that you can afford. Everybody needs to speak up so that Congress and The Fed stop spending money while it is still discretionary. They will refuse to listen until a large section of the electorate speaks out.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Economic Crisis 2008 - Explained
Feel free to correct me where I am wrong, but here is my understanding of the complex contributors to our current economic crisis. Clearly, no single person or group is to blame. It is the culmination of poor accounting practices and unsound policies in several markets working together. Do not think for a minute that it is somehow not the "1929 Stock Market Collapse" for our time.
The fundamental unit for the current crisis is the housing market. The housing bubble allowed homes to be purchased for much more than their "real" value. The money that was lent on these homes was indisputably provided by the lenders and received by the seller. Where this money was spent is entirely at the discretion of those that received it, even if they are greedy capitalists. Unfortunately, much of this money was invested back into the overpriced and overstocked real estate market.
The multiplier for the crisis is the financial instrument called the Credit Default Swap. Let's make a comparison using common, household situations like Life Insurance. When Skip is raising his children, he takes out a Life Insurance policy for $1 Million. This is important because his children are directly benefiting from his salary, leadership, and housework. This is covered by the insurance company because they are investing his payments into the markets for returns that will cover their outstanding policies.
The first risk they take is when they start wagering that Skip is healthy enough that he will live until the policy has expired (if Term Life) or is fully funded by Skip (if Whole Life). The benefit of this wager is to lower premiums and thereby bring in additional business. By itself, this risk is usually well-calculated, but still can result in the failure of an insurance company. As a simple example, a large group of healthy wage-earners could suddenly be impacted by a natural disaster, bankrupting the insurance company. The remedy for this is to insure people across various geographical locations.
The second risk is when the insurance company decides it can continue to sell life insurance to Skip's children when they start earning their own money. There is no longer a need for Skip's income and help. There is merely a desire for payout on Skip's death. Originally it was accepted in order to cover the costs of burial or cremation. But, it has grown to where it is wholly discretionary. In our example, Skip's 3 children each take out a $1M policy on Skip. Now the Insurance company has grown, due to the ability to offer more payouts. If we only look at the boom to the industry, without acknowledging the increased risk then we increase the likelihood of unforeseen, and thereby catastrophic, failure. Let's assume now that we have one-fourth of the people affected by the aforementioned natural disaster. The payout is the same as before, if there are now 4 policies on each person. We have increased our risk by 4, but not increased our premiums to accommodate that risk. More likely, we have decreased the premiums further because we have increased our income by doing so.
The third risk adds another multiplier. Investors, watching the growth in the insurance company, decide to invest directly into the company. Bear in mind that insurance companies rely on the markets to store and grow their income. Premiums paid by the policy holder are minor compared to the income earned through investments. These premiums are critical, mostly as an indicator of the health of the company. Now the investment company makes money when the insurance company makes money. The only risk to the system is the death of a lot of healthy people, like Skip. But, we have spread that risk across geographies and income levels.
Now we see what really happened. Instead of insuring Skip against death, we are insuring Skip's mortgage against foreclosure. When the housing bubble burst, many homes were lost. More importantly, the rating of the lenders and insurance companies were reduced. Once this happened, their ability to invest and be invested in was reduced. With a reduced income stream, some of these companies failed or were in danger of failing. The investment companies that had invested in these companies now had to be downgraded also.
Remember Skip's children in the original example? They are still there. Multiple policies were issued against the mortgage companies ability to pay. When one group started to have trouble, it rippled across many others. There was no oversight or regulation on the insuring of loans, investments, and the companies that engaged in it. Until we hit this crisis, it was unclear how extensive this practice was or the impact it could have. In addition, it is far removed from most people so it was not a priority when some people called attention to it.
Next Post: Why EVERYONE needs to know this NOW!
The fundamental unit for the current crisis is the housing market. The housing bubble allowed homes to be purchased for much more than their "real" value. The money that was lent on these homes was indisputably provided by the lenders and received by the seller. Where this money was spent is entirely at the discretion of those that received it, even if they are greedy capitalists. Unfortunately, much of this money was invested back into the overpriced and overstocked real estate market.
The multiplier for the crisis is the financial instrument called the Credit Default Swap. Let's make a comparison using common, household situations like Life Insurance. When Skip is raising his children, he takes out a Life Insurance policy for $1 Million. This is important because his children are directly benefiting from his salary, leadership, and housework. This is covered by the insurance company because they are investing his payments into the markets for returns that will cover their outstanding policies.
The first risk they take is when they start wagering that Skip is healthy enough that he will live until the policy has expired (if Term Life) or is fully funded by Skip (if Whole Life). The benefit of this wager is to lower premiums and thereby bring in additional business. By itself, this risk is usually well-calculated, but still can result in the failure of an insurance company. As a simple example, a large group of healthy wage-earners could suddenly be impacted by a natural disaster, bankrupting the insurance company. The remedy for this is to insure people across various geographical locations.
The second risk is when the insurance company decides it can continue to sell life insurance to Skip's children when they start earning their own money. There is no longer a need for Skip's income and help. There is merely a desire for payout on Skip's death. Originally it was accepted in order to cover the costs of burial or cremation. But, it has grown to where it is wholly discretionary. In our example, Skip's 3 children each take out a $1M policy on Skip. Now the Insurance company has grown, due to the ability to offer more payouts. If we only look at the boom to the industry, without acknowledging the increased risk then we increase the likelihood of unforeseen, and thereby catastrophic, failure. Let's assume now that we have one-fourth of the people affected by the aforementioned natural disaster. The payout is the same as before, if there are now 4 policies on each person. We have increased our risk by 4, but not increased our premiums to accommodate that risk. More likely, we have decreased the premiums further because we have increased our income by doing so.
The third risk adds another multiplier. Investors, watching the growth in the insurance company, decide to invest directly into the company. Bear in mind that insurance companies rely on the markets to store and grow their income. Premiums paid by the policy holder are minor compared to the income earned through investments. These premiums are critical, mostly as an indicator of the health of the company. Now the investment company makes money when the insurance company makes money. The only risk to the system is the death of a lot of healthy people, like Skip. But, we have spread that risk across geographies and income levels.
Now we see what really happened. Instead of insuring Skip against death, we are insuring Skip's mortgage against foreclosure. When the housing bubble burst, many homes were lost. More importantly, the rating of the lenders and insurance companies were reduced. Once this happened, their ability to invest and be invested in was reduced. With a reduced income stream, some of these companies failed or were in danger of failing. The investment companies that had invested in these companies now had to be downgraded also.
Remember Skip's children in the original example? They are still there. Multiple policies were issued against the mortgage companies ability to pay. When one group started to have trouble, it rippled across many others. There was no oversight or regulation on the insuring of loans, investments, and the companies that engaged in it. Until we hit this crisis, it was unclear how extensive this practice was or the impact it could have. In addition, it is far removed from most people so it was not a priority when some people called attention to it.
Next Post: Why EVERYONE needs to know this NOW!
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Obama's Destructive Change
This needs to be shouted from the rooftops, because it will definitely NOT be covered by the Mainstream Media. Barack Obama was one of a group of lawyers that sued Citibank for not giving loans to prospective homebuyers that could not afford them. This puts Barack Obama on the front line in the war to destroy our economy.
Not only that, but Barack and his friends are still working to take government funds for these groups, like ACORN. What is even worse, these groups are being used to campaign for Barack Obama. That means they are using general government funds, earmarked for assisting the poor, to benefit a particular candidate. If this is not a violation of Campaign laws, it is only because the Democrats have made sure that it doesn't come up for consideration.
Not only that, but Barack and his friends are still working to take government funds for these groups, like ACORN. What is even worse, these groups are being used to campaign for Barack Obama. That means they are using general government funds, earmarked for assisting the poor, to benefit a particular candidate. If this is not a violation of Campaign laws, it is only because the Democrats have made sure that it doesn't come up for consideration.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Obama's Closest Friends
Are you voting for Obama, expecting change from insider politics and greed? If so, you will be sorely disappointed. Here is a quick rundown of Obama's well known friends:
Jeremiah Wright - Militant black preacher
Connection: Married the Obamas and baptized their children. Longtime friend and Spiritual Advisor.
Issues: Hate speech against whites and America. Supports militant Muslim leaders such as Louis Farrakhan.
Tony Rezko - Businessman, Lawyer
Connection: Business Associate. First political contributor to Obama and first fundraiser. Fellow Real Estate investor.
Issues: Fraudulent business practices (wire fraud, passing bad checks, extortion, et al). Influence peddling (using influence with public officials to demand kickbacks from companies desiring to do business with the government).
William Ayers - Terrorist, Professor, Community Organizer
Connection: Friend, Fellow Board Member
Issues: Remorseless Terrorist Leader of the Weatherman Underground.
James Johnson - Businessman, Politician
Connection: VP selection committee leader
Issues: CEO of FannieMae, Managing Director of Lehman Brothers. Improperly deferred expenses to get a substantial bonus. Substantially underreported compensation. Received unethical loans from Countrywide CEO. In addition to his connections to the failed companies previously noted, his resume includes being failed candidate Walter Mondale's Campaign Manager. You may want to avoid investing in other companies where he sits on the board - KB Home, Target, Goldman-Sachs, Gannett, Temple-Inland, and UnitedHealth.
Rashid Khalidi - Professor, Activist, Founder of Arab American Action Network
Connection: Friend to the Obamas, AAAN received $75000
Issues: Openly espouses the viewpoint that Palestinians are within their rights to terrorize Israeli soldiers and citizens because he considers it resistance fighting.
Obama established most of these friendships during his early days in Chicago Politics. All of these people have maintained these relationships as they're careers have progressed over two decades. All of these people have stated they support Obama specifically because he thinks like they do.
Jeremiah Wright - Militant black preacher
Connection: Married the Obamas and baptized their children. Longtime friend and Spiritual Advisor.
Issues: Hate speech against whites and America. Supports militant Muslim leaders such as Louis Farrakhan.
Tony Rezko - Businessman, Lawyer
Connection: Business Associate. First political contributor to Obama and first fundraiser. Fellow Real Estate investor.
Issues: Fraudulent business practices (wire fraud, passing bad checks, extortion, et al). Influence peddling (using influence with public officials to demand kickbacks from companies desiring to do business with the government).
William Ayers - Terrorist, Professor, Community Organizer
Connection: Friend, Fellow Board Member
Issues: Remorseless Terrorist Leader of the Weatherman Underground.
James Johnson - Businessman, Politician
Connection: VP selection committee leader
Issues: CEO of FannieMae, Managing Director of Lehman Brothers. Improperly deferred expenses to get a substantial bonus. Substantially underreported compensation. Received unethical loans from Countrywide CEO. In addition to his connections to the failed companies previously noted, his resume includes being failed candidate Walter Mondale's Campaign Manager. You may want to avoid investing in other companies where he sits on the board - KB Home, Target, Goldman-Sachs, Gannett, Temple-Inland, and UnitedHealth.
Rashid Khalidi - Professor, Activist, Founder of Arab American Action Network
Connection: Friend to the Obamas, AAAN received $75000
Issues: Openly espouses the viewpoint that Palestinians are within their rights to terrorize Israeli soldiers and citizens because he considers it resistance fighting.
Obama established most of these friendships during his early days in Chicago Politics. All of these people have maintained these relationships as they're careers have progressed over two decades. All of these people have stated they support Obama specifically because he thinks like they do.
Friday, August 29, 2008
McCain's Easy Rebuttal to Obama
McCain can easily hit back at some of the ridiculous assumptions and claims made by Barak Obama during his convention speech. Obama's entire speech hammered home that Americans, despite our remarkable history, are now unable to achieve the great heights achieved by our forefathers.
Americans today have even more opportunity and support to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps. Leftists want to tell you that you are not entitled enough. Obama even claims you can't pull yourself up by your bootstraps because you have no boots. Now, how could anybody in this country today be without boots? There are numerous, quality churches throughout this nation that help clothe the naked and feed the hungry, every day of the year. When people fall on hard times, neighbors and friends are there with a helping hand. It is only when people look to these handouts as their source of income do they begin to dry up. This is where the government fails people. It does not have the ability to tell when the need is gone, yet the individual fails to take responsibility for their own existence. This is why welfare should not be a plank in any party's platform. It makes sense to offer short term assistance in unexpected or dire situations. It does not make sense to provide suckling to full grown adults.
Democrats want to measure progress by unemployment and savings rates. But, at the same time, they offer incentives for those who live beyond their income. They want to rescue you from your own decisions; leaving you no opportunity to learn and grow through a process of finding your own solutions. When you remove the consequences from people's actions, you will quickly find that the worst decisions will be the most oft repeated.
Barak Obama has numerous examples of where his forebears and others have fought the hard fight, and come out the victor. These people deserve every ounce of praise they receive. They deserve to have a child that can be a candidate for President of the United States. This is what they fought for. They do not deserve to have thier sacrifice belittled by claiming that it is not a worthwhile endeavor today. We should not stand idly by while we are told that we do not have the fortitude to be able to do as they did. We are not entitled to honor, bravery, strength, or courage. Nobody can bestow these admirable traits upon us. They can only be attained by working the long hours, making the hard decisions, and doing the thankless jobs.
Too many people are asking us to turn our lives over to someone else. They want employees of the government to make the decisions on how we will receive our health care. They want the government workers to decide what is the best course to pursue when it comes to Energy, Transportation, and Housing. They feel that a small group of centralized people can make a better decision than those who are closest to home and the everyday experiences that these decisions will impact. Americans need to consider the effectiveness of ANY single-provider system. When you limit your options to a single provider, the provider no longer has a motivation to provide quality service or affordable prices. Don't let them tell you that this will change. Health Care will become exactly like the electric company that brings power to your house. The only way to change your options will be to move away.
Taxes: Regardless of your feeling on whether tax reductions or tax increases will better fuel the economy, one thing cannot be disputed. Enacting an even greater tax disparity between what is considered rich and what is considered poor will only serve to keep the poor from ever becoming rich. The gap that will have to be overcome, for a middle income family to become a wealthy family, will be widened by the increase in taxes on the "rich". At that point, individuals and families will be faced with the very real possibility that a relatively minor increase in their income will drastically increase their tax burden.
Obama has big plans for our automotive and energy industries. But, how sound are these plans. I'll assume they are more complex than inflating tires and getting regular oil changes. But, how many freedoms do we have to give up for the gains they promise to deliver? Obama wants to put a stop to all decision making that does not fall right in line with his fairness doctrines. Insurance companies cannot discriminate against those who wish to be insured. He means that they will be required to pay for the treatment of ill or injured patients. But, it will also be discrimination if they fail to pay for drunk drivers, illicit drug users, and arsonists? Sen. Obama would like to build a society so full of safety nets that Americans will be entwined in a web of bureacracy at every turn.
Where will the money come from, to fund all of Sen. Obama's big plans? That is easy to answer. It will come directly from the corporations and individuals who are fueling the largest economy in the history of the world. There is no possible alternative economy plan to replace the dollars that will be taken from the personal investments, retirement savings, and research and development accounts. Billions of dollars have been already been poured into the promise of cheap solar energy for over 30 years. What guarantee do we have the Obama can deliver the breakthroughs in alternate energy that he intends to spend an additional 150 Billion Dollars for?
Change does NOT happen because we rise up and demand it. Change happens when we go to work and enact it. Our soldiers entered Afqhanistan and Iraq because we were not getting any results although the United States, alongside the United Nations, demanded change. Our soldiers stepped up to do the job that needed to be done, without demanding a lifetime of security for their service. We will only retain our freedom if we, too, go to work each day and show that we can do more with our personal freedoms than the government can do with its central planning.
Americans today have even more opportunity and support to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps. Leftists want to tell you that you are not entitled enough. Obama even claims you can't pull yourself up by your bootstraps because you have no boots. Now, how could anybody in this country today be without boots? There are numerous, quality churches throughout this nation that help clothe the naked and feed the hungry, every day of the year. When people fall on hard times, neighbors and friends are there with a helping hand. It is only when people look to these handouts as their source of income do they begin to dry up. This is where the government fails people. It does not have the ability to tell when the need is gone, yet the individual fails to take responsibility for their own existence. This is why welfare should not be a plank in any party's platform. It makes sense to offer short term assistance in unexpected or dire situations. It does not make sense to provide suckling to full grown adults.
Democrats want to measure progress by unemployment and savings rates. But, at the same time, they offer incentives for those who live beyond their income. They want to rescue you from your own decisions; leaving you no opportunity to learn and grow through a process of finding your own solutions. When you remove the consequences from people's actions, you will quickly find that the worst decisions will be the most oft repeated.
Barak Obama has numerous examples of where his forebears and others have fought the hard fight, and come out the victor. These people deserve every ounce of praise they receive. They deserve to have a child that can be a candidate for President of the United States. This is what they fought for. They do not deserve to have thier sacrifice belittled by claiming that it is not a worthwhile endeavor today. We should not stand idly by while we are told that we do not have the fortitude to be able to do as they did. We are not entitled to honor, bravery, strength, or courage. Nobody can bestow these admirable traits upon us. They can only be attained by working the long hours, making the hard decisions, and doing the thankless jobs.
Too many people are asking us to turn our lives over to someone else. They want employees of the government to make the decisions on how we will receive our health care. They want the government workers to decide what is the best course to pursue when it comes to Energy, Transportation, and Housing. They feel that a small group of centralized people can make a better decision than those who are closest to home and the everyday experiences that these decisions will impact. Americans need to consider the effectiveness of ANY single-provider system. When you limit your options to a single provider, the provider no longer has a motivation to provide quality service or affordable prices. Don't let them tell you that this will change. Health Care will become exactly like the electric company that brings power to your house. The only way to change your options will be to move away.
Taxes: Regardless of your feeling on whether tax reductions or tax increases will better fuel the economy, one thing cannot be disputed. Enacting an even greater tax disparity between what is considered rich and what is considered poor will only serve to keep the poor from ever becoming rich. The gap that will have to be overcome, for a middle income family to become a wealthy family, will be widened by the increase in taxes on the "rich". At that point, individuals and families will be faced with the very real possibility that a relatively minor increase in their income will drastically increase their tax burden.
Obama has big plans for our automotive and energy industries. But, how sound are these plans. I'll assume they are more complex than inflating tires and getting regular oil changes. But, how many freedoms do we have to give up for the gains they promise to deliver? Obama wants to put a stop to all decision making that does not fall right in line with his fairness doctrines. Insurance companies cannot discriminate against those who wish to be insured. He means that they will be required to pay for the treatment of ill or injured patients. But, it will also be discrimination if they fail to pay for drunk drivers, illicit drug users, and arsonists? Sen. Obama would like to build a society so full of safety nets that Americans will be entwined in a web of bureacracy at every turn.
Where will the money come from, to fund all of Sen. Obama's big plans? That is easy to answer. It will come directly from the corporations and individuals who are fueling the largest economy in the history of the world. There is no possible alternative economy plan to replace the dollars that will be taken from the personal investments, retirement savings, and research and development accounts. Billions of dollars have been already been poured into the promise of cheap solar energy for over 30 years. What guarantee do we have the Obama can deliver the breakthroughs in alternate energy that he intends to spend an additional 150 Billion Dollars for?
Change does NOT happen because we rise up and demand it. Change happens when we go to work and enact it. Our soldiers entered Afqhanistan and Iraq because we were not getting any results although the United States, alongside the United Nations, demanded change. Our soldiers stepped up to do the job that needed to be done, without demanding a lifetime of security for their service. We will only retain our freedom if we, too, go to work each day and show that we can do more with our personal freedoms than the government can do with its central planning.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Conserve our way out???
There are some obvious facts that the Pelosi types refuse to acknowledge. Americans, and the rest of the world, will continue to use oil. America is literally flooded with oil. And, nobody runs a larger, cleaner economy than the United States of America.
Conservation is a great idea. There is no reason to waste a resource. But, we use oil for more than just refining it into gasoline to put in passenger cars. When you consider jet fuel, diesel fuel for trucking, and cheap plastics, there is no viable alternative to oil. Alternatives may one day be developed, but they are still in their infancy, today.
America has huge deposits of oil, which are easy to tap. Centuries ago, oil seeping to the surface was a pollutant, with little practical use. We have turned this pollutant into a valuable resource. It has reshaped the political scene, providing power to states that have not earned the trust of their constituency. This is the strongest reason for keeping the government's hands out of the pockets of the oil companies. Governments that earn their own income have no need to listen to their citizens. The profits he gleans from the nationalized oil companies is how Hugo Chavez is able to remain in power, against the will of the Venezuelan people.
The only way to release ourselves, and our friends, from the tyranny of countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Russia is to produce our own oil. There is no reason we cannot. This independence in the energy arena will spill over to become strengths for our economy, political muscle, and our options for the future.
No other country should be granted the opportunity to capitalize on America's resources, over and above America's companies. American companies will be able to recover the oil more efficiently than any other country's. Americans will hold themselves to higher standards of ethics and environmental concern than other countries, because we will be the ones directly harmed by any accidents.
The oil is there for our use, and sitting on it just causes our economy and political strength to sink further down the pit that environmentalists have been digging over the last few centuries. America has the ability to quickly and cleanly return to a position of strength and leadership in a world that needs the shining light of Free Enterprise.
Conservation is a great idea. There is no reason to waste a resource. But, we use oil for more than just refining it into gasoline to put in passenger cars. When you consider jet fuel, diesel fuel for trucking, and cheap plastics, there is no viable alternative to oil. Alternatives may one day be developed, but they are still in their infancy, today.
America has huge deposits of oil, which are easy to tap. Centuries ago, oil seeping to the surface was a pollutant, with little practical use. We have turned this pollutant into a valuable resource. It has reshaped the political scene, providing power to states that have not earned the trust of their constituency. This is the strongest reason for keeping the government's hands out of the pockets of the oil companies. Governments that earn their own income have no need to listen to their citizens. The profits he gleans from the nationalized oil companies is how Hugo Chavez is able to remain in power, against the will of the Venezuelan people.
The only way to release ourselves, and our friends, from the tyranny of countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Russia is to produce our own oil. There is no reason we cannot. This independence in the energy arena will spill over to become strengths for our economy, political muscle, and our options for the future.
No other country should be granted the opportunity to capitalize on America's resources, over and above America's companies. American companies will be able to recover the oil more efficiently than any other country's. Americans will hold themselves to higher standards of ethics and environmental concern than other countries, because we will be the ones directly harmed by any accidents.
The oil is there for our use, and sitting on it just causes our economy and political strength to sink further down the pit that environmentalists have been digging over the last few centuries. America has the ability to quickly and cleanly return to a position of strength and leadership in a world that needs the shining light of Free Enterprise.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Thomas Jefferson fights against Big Government
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." - Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764.
The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.
Most bad government has grown out of too much government.
Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.
I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.
A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.
The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." - Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764.
The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.
Most bad government has grown out of too much government.
Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.
I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.
A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.
The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
