Government should subsidize my poetic life

Now I reply: 1. The Con writes, "Your poems are not benefiting the nation" and says my contention is based upon an "informal fallacy known as 'Appeal to Consequences' which is when an argument concludes a hypotheses to be true due to the undesirable consequences. " I reply that when we are speaking of national security, the consequences of not allowing my poems to benefit the nation are vital to the validity of the contention. I am arguing that, from a practical perspective, national security and the future of the United States is inversely proportional to my cat poems, and, therefore, you may say that my contention itself is odd, but you must admit that the consequences do matter here, and are not fallacious. I would like the Con to concede this point. The Con also takes issue with my assertion that "without art. . . the nation has no hope. " Yet my Con cannot show a single nation that has hope but has no great art. In a similary vein, the Con may argue that handsome men without handlebar mustaches exist, but until the Con can show us a man who is: a. Handsome b. has no handlebar mustache we can then reasonably conclude that handsomeness is inversely proportional to having a handle-bar mustache. The Con must concede this point for the sake of intellectual integrity. 2. The Con also does not seem to realize the vital role American culture played in defeating the Soviet Union. My dear Con has apparently not read this article: . http://www.thedailybeast.com... I quote: "Elvis was the king of rock and roll and the star of 33 Hollywood films, and he"s also America"s most famous Cold War veteran. In 1958"60, he served in Germany in a tank unit during the Berlin Crisis. The East Germans regarded Elvis as a problem they had to counter; the U. S. military regarded him as an opportunity they could exploit. Elvis mattered"a lot"to both sides in the Cold War. . . During those years, Elvis loomed large in official East German thinking about the Cold War. The East German leaders described him as a threat"the country"s defense minister, Willi Stoph, declared that Elvis"s rock and roll was 'a means of seduction to make the youth ripe for atomic war. ' In April 1959, East German Communist Party leader Walter Ulbricht told a cultural conference that it was 'not enough to reject the capitalist decadence with words, to . .. speak out against the ecstatic "singing" of someone like Presley. We have to offer something better. " Clearly, culture had much to do with winning the war against Russia. If the Russians saw Elvis as a threat, he was a threat. Similarly, my cat poems are a threat to tyranny everywhere, and they will help America loom large on the international stage. 3. The Con then seems to imply --- to my chagrin --- that my cat poems are not worth $2,000 a month, and that $2,000 is an "unreasonable demand. " Here is my monthly budget --- you tell me if it is unreasonable, considering (all numbers rounded up): $550 = Rent. $20 = Car insurance $30-60 = Electric $70 = Internet $10-40 = Gas $15 = Phone $14 = Netflix $10 = Amazon Kindle unlimited $30 = Health insurance $310 = Groceries $150 = Cat food $90 = Cat toys $230 = Cat fashion (sweaters, mittens, hats, scarfs, little bells to go on tail) $120 = Anime $90 = Paperback and hardback books $10 = Gas for car $220 = Vitamins, herbal supplements $60 = Coffee By my calculations, this is clearly over $3,000. I am asking that the Government simply give me enough for me and my cats to starve to death. I will make up the extra money by playing banjo outside of the mall. Now, is that really unreasonable? Of course not? Let's look at the defense budget - from 2009 to 2010, it was 683.7 BILLION DOLLARS. . http://en.wikipedia.org... And you mean to tell me they can't give me $2,000 a month --- and a few extras --- considering the great benefits my poetry will give the US government? Now, I will admit that I like your cat poem very much and after I was done enjoying it, my heart quickly turned to jealousy. But, that was petty of me. The smooth, vivid lines, and the measured yet elegant word-choices were enough to make my own poem seem like a cat-box biscuit, in comparison. Yet, just because your cat poems are worth atleast $10,000 a month stipend does not mean my own poems are not worth $2,000. The Con should concede this point out of the benefit for all humanity. Now, I would like my Con to addres this 4th point: 4. The Ottoman Empire paid stipends to its poets, and was able to last from 1299-1923. That is over a thousand years. Let me quote Brittanica: "Throughout the Ottoman Empire"s early history, either official patronage or a good position in the bureaucracy"or both"were available (and often attained) by poets who were from provincial cities or otherwise outside the inner circles of Ottoman rulers. . . The simplest form of patronage was the annual stipend. During the 15th and 16th centuries the sultan Bayezid II granted an annual stipend to each of more than 30 poets. . . he entry of Rustem Pasha into the office of grand vizier in 1555 ushered in a new period of fiscal austerity and antiliterary sentiment in which new poets had a much slimmer chance of patronage. The real and apparently inexorable decline in state patronage for poetry set in with the accession of Murad III as sultan in 1574. " . http://www.britannica.com... Note, the Ottoman Empire began to decline exactly as around the time it ceased giving stipends to its Turkish cat-poets. So, in summation, you may argue that my poems are not good enough to help the United States, but that is not the issue: if they are not good enough today, it is because I need to struggle and slave as a pan-handler and couch-surfer. If the government gives me the tools I need to increase my poetry then, like Elvis during the Cold War, I will be a threat to nations who are against us, and my poems will inspire the youth of these nations to rise up and become Democracies. However, my poetry is improving quite a bit since my initial post. Look at this new one I wrote --- holy crapola its good: O ye of confused visage, Charlie, the stink cat, thou runnest across the carpet but art chased by nothing. Thou once piddled on the couch, yet I forgave thee. Do it again, and, I swear it, by my troth,* I shall have thee declawed. * a common Norse Viking phrase meaning "by my faith"