From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott)
Subject: Re: Death of America
Summary: Just because it's animate, doesn't mean it lives 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: Zombo Vamp Roboid Borg Gore
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 06:39:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.024829.3387@athena.mit.edu>, 
cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes...

>In article <13DEC199219304722@utarlg.uta.edu> 
>b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott) writes:

>>Let's see: Move all the manufacturing out, since it's cheaper to
>>produce overseas. Cut American incomes in tenths, since they're 
>>overpaid according to market principles. Ah yes I see, but...
> 
>the destruction of the manufacturing base is the problem, not the solution.
>i for one have never said otherwise.
> 
>and north americans are overpaid. but there's no need to cut our
>incomes -- inflation will take care of that in time.

No you haven't said it, that I know of. That was directed to the wider
"audience," who is welcome to jump in at any time. Especially the
NAFTA proponents, be they libertarian, free market conservatives,
or corporatives. Perhaps you do side with them on the matter?

Even though NAFTA is such an obvious illusion. Such as the free-market
inside of Amerika. The one that liscenses broadcast companies, and
restricts cable and telephone companies, and such (food, drugs, health,
..). 

Amazing how sticking "Free Trade" in something automatically garners
support. 

And even if the government just hands out checks left and right 
(why print money, checks will do) why would "monetized" dollars
buy what's produced abroad? Trash is trash after all.

>>  Who's going to buy the products produced abroad since the
>>  American Market is being destroyed??
> 
>the importance of the american market is unfortunately over-estimated.
>this isn't the 50's any more. there was a time not long ago that the US
>of 75% of the world's GDP. it is nowhere near that now. when/if europe
>finally gets its act together and forms its union, we won't even be the
>largest any more. and that's just now -- wait a few years.

I reckon the EC citizens, will find their factories in Somalia, and the
like. Why would the globalist not duplicate what's going on here over
there? To a very large extent, I think its just the opposite, especially
considering EFTA. (circa 1959, for those interested)

>>And as a reminder, even Ross Perot never covered dealing with the
>>Federal *Debt*, only austerity measures for resolving the yearly
>>Federal Deficit -- which would have taken too long to accomplish to 
>>make any difference, anyhow. (As I was saying Charles.)
> 
>as *you* were saying?
>don't get me wrong, the poetry was cute, the quotes were nifty and i'm
>glad you're now actually discussing this, but....

You hand out compliments like you do name-calling. Thanks anyway.
Back to the issues.

>>And no one
>>is willing to bring state & local debt into the analysis for fear
>>that the lenders will all die of a heart attack.
> 
>true and sad.
>though some states appear to be trying to do something about it..

The power of the states were constitutionally slashed by the Supreme 
Court, and finally broken during the Civil War. What a state can do
now largely rest on moneys funneled back from the federal government.
Unless the citizens of a state were willing to give up those funds, 
which they've paid in already, they'll remain satellites. At least 
until an xssr-like dissolution. 

My new and shiny _world almanac '93_ p. 137, shows US cumulative state
debt as $345 B for '91. When last I went into the Dept. of Commerce
"Government Finances" report for '89-'90, total state *and local* debt 
was something like $900 billion. 

(I've become more specific in terminology here since the experts draw a
distinction and I can no longer just generally say "state debt" meaning
all-governments non-federal. Something like the "deficit/debt" game.) 

The states mostly are too big for me to look to for meaningful progress.
And are in fact a large part of the problem.

>>The "simple sad fact" is... (as Broward Horne would put it)
>>
>>   America is a corpse on life-support now. Rather than live
>>   with all the pain, let's pull the plug and get on with it.
> 
>is he wrong?

Well I goofed, I should have said,

The "simple sad fact"  (as Broward Horne would put it) is...

   America is a corpse...  [my assertion]

"Sad" certainly, I'll mourn with the rest, in fact I keep black-ribbons
around to remind me that the American Spirit is still being held hostage
by the Globalist. I did most of my grieving back in july though, when
the media killed the American Dream. Not surprisingly, the Black Ribbon
is growing in meaning for me as a symbol now, basically because I'm an
ideological anarchist. And I'll wear it as sackcloth and ashes until
the resurrection of the the Red, White & Blue. 

>>The quicker it's dead, the quicker the new Phoenix will arise. Easiest
>>way to do that ...

to "kill the national zombie" that is

>>...is use emergency powers to implement centralized universal 
>>health, universal education, right to food and shelter, infrastructure
>>programs, etc. -- you know, The Soviet Model. Congress will back it, no
>>problem. And we still have military dominance so no one will mess with
>>us in the process. Unless we wait. 
> 
>in my mind, that isn't pulling the plug at all. that's degrading the
>body so that it dies even without life support.

Assuming such central control methods were able to persist very long
you'd be right. I'm fascinated with just how short-lived the Soviet
Union was in comparison with other "empires," thinking in 100 to 500
year typical `life-spans.' USSR: lets just round off and say 75 years.
<requiescat in pace.>

Popular Democratic philosphy (republicans don't matter at this point),
would have it that the government is a driving force of the economy.
But what happened during the 80s, under the authorship of people like
Bentsen, (and the majority of those who'll make up the 103rd congress), 
was to stimulate and sustain growth through government spending and 
borrowing. Kinda like being on drugs. At least 43 million Americans
believe this can continue. I'm asserting the nation has overdosed,
couldn't stop credit-spending if it wanted to, is running rampant like
a crazed-addict on PCP -- and should be put out of it's misery. It's
not like there's anyone big-enough around to stop =it= from taking 
another main-line hit. So juice the shot up by calling for immediate
implementation of all the socialist-totalitarian plans. That's what the
Demo-Totalitarians want to hear anyway. They can't help but lunge for
it.

Am I worried? Nope. The Soviets took 75 years, in our current economic
state it may take 4 years if they're given free reign. And yes I changed 
to your metaphor.

>pulling the plug would
>be quitting the socialistic garbage cold turkey. unless you mean the
>death of the country. i'd rather see the death of the econo-political
>system that got us here -- there's nothing wrong with the country
>itself.

About the vigor of the megalopolii I don't know; I doubt they're well off
as a matter of complexity. However the `econo-political' system is most
clearly represented by the standing government. (I should repeat my last
sentence for the benefit of the browsers.) 

It is true, that the country, (people and lands, bloodlines and shared
hope), will survive. I say that thinking about my irish ancestors who
were in Virginia before the US revolution, and also in Texas before it
became a republic, and IN DEEP RESPECT for my comanche ancestors (which
all YOU pure blood Europeans alive today tried to kill and should be
very, very ashamed of ;^). (There's a bit of welch and black dutch
thrown in, but I haven't worked up the resolve to claim them yet.
Oops, from a tangent to a tangent, let's see...) 

"Nations" come and go, merely as a matter of politics. "Countries"
remain. Others will disagree with the distinctions, but I hope I've
communicated my point. "Give 'em line."

In so many words CK, I believe we agree. Neither of us see any help
coming from the federal government which doesn't require selling 
your soul and your first born's, and their first born's, and...

I've sketched an appealing alternative for myself and believers in 
the non-institutional communities thread, and yes I recognize that it
obviously doesn't extend to the nation, or the country at large. Though
it may be possible for an academic community, or some other "with a
focus greater than the nation can muster," to establish itself as an
alternative inside the system as well. 

My material needs are meager though. I'll gladly forego whatever the
government offers as a bribe. If I had six kids, a mother-in-law,
and a wife -- no doubt I'd need a lot more material, and I'd be a 
Democrat.

>p.s. your description sounds as much like canada as it does the soviet union.
>i am told they want to pass a bill there guaranteeing the "right to
>shelter". perversion.

No doubt while mandating housing codes.

I have to admit in browsing the canadian thread that, I found several
points interesting. The one that comes most strongly to mind was made
by the socialist I think, oddly enough, who observed that what works
in Canada (socialism-wise) may not in America due to size. I take this
for granted, first as a simple extension of information theory. 

To get a message through a large, complex system, with minimal errors, 
a good deal of redundancy has to be put in (we used to call this red
tape considering the bureaucracy). That redundancy (which is what
bureaucracy is really about) so slows down the system that beyond a
certain size, the errors incurred will cause the whole system to fail. 

I could speculate about alienation, or the leaders being out of touch,
or about the methods used to try to counter such problems (like making
everyone and everything uniform, ...er universal, ...err national),
but the insidious corruption of those who are intent on abusing others
far outweighs the cumulative error effect. Certainly not something
peculiar to large nations like Rome or the Soviet Union. BUT it is
aggravated by size. (Absolute power corrupts...) 

And the bigger the loop, the bigger the scam. 
Shall I go back to poetry?

-=  Government today is an "anarchy of regulation," with hundreds   =-
-=  of administrative units independent of the president (although  =-
-=  most of them are not supposed to be) and independent of their   =-
-=  departments.  -- Michael J. Parenti _Democracy for the Few_     =- 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy