Friday, February 22, 2008

A Parasite's Priorities (Updated, February 23)

"I see nothing! NO-thiiinnng!": Affable, purblind doofus Sgt. Schultz, the patron saint of German Bank Regulators.

Klaus Zumwinkel, former CEO of Deutsche Post -- the German postal service and parent of the DHL parcel delivery company -- lost his job last week. He may soon go to prison. His "crime" was to protect his legitimately earned wealth from the omnivorous socialist bureaucracy that afflicts Germany. He did so by opening a foundation in neighboring Lichtenstein, where his earnings were protected by the banking secrecy laws of that tiny (pop. circa 35,000) but heroic principality.

During his tenure as head of Deutsche Post, concedes the New York Times, Zumwinkel "helped transform [the postal service] ... from a stodgy state bureaucracy into a publicly listed logistics and freight-delivery powerhouse...."

Despite operating within a thoroughly socialized business environment, Zumwinkel -- through the tenacious application of his considerable gifts -- added a great deal more wealth to his society than what he earned. Yet he is now being traduced by the German State as an enemy of society for the supposed crime of tax evasion. Even if he avoids prison, he won't get his severance.

Stefan Ortseifen is another German executive who is stepping down from a lofty post in Germany's corporate world. As head of the IKB, a Dusseldorf-based German bank, Ortseifen has presided over a lengthy series of government-subsidized catastrophes. In contrast with the huge net contribution to German wealth made by Zumwinkel, Ortseifen's ineptitude and mismanagement have destroyed billions of dollars' worth of capital, and his failing bank has devoured billions more in direct government subsidies.

With the serene confidence conferred by the knowledge that the taxpayers would absorb any losses, IKB invested huge sums in the sub-prime mortgage market here in the United States. As he did so, Ortseifen consciously defrauded investors, depositors, and the German public by assuring them that "uncertainties in the American mortgage market" would have "practically no effect" on the health of IKB's investments.

This was an obvious and vulgar lie, as would be recognized by any sentient being (or perhaps even Sean Hannity... well, maybe not). And just days after the last such assurance departed Ortseifen's schnitzel-hole, "IKB was on the verge of bankruptcy, with its supposed wonderful US investments worth little more than the paper [they were] printed on," recounts Der Spiegel.

At the very least, Ortseifen should be investigated for fraud and subject to both criminal and civi liability. Instead, he will be allowed to retire on his own terms and keep his pension, which is something north of $40,000 a month.

Liechtenstein's Castle Vaduz, one of many scenic attractions in that tiny but breathtakingly beautiful country.

In propping up America's government-abetted mortgage mess, Ortseifen pissed away countless billions of dollars earned by other people. Zumwinkel's "crime," recall, was to send his own money abroad to keep it out of the hands of people like Ortseifen.

Only to a mind entirely hostage to socialist assumptions -- and thus willing to abide the existence of an untouchable, unfathomably wealthy Nomenklatura -- could say that this makes any kind of sense.

In the decades since the advent of the Federal Reserve System in annus horribilis 1913, the entire world banking system has become intertwined with government -- both national and trans-national.

Germany's banking system may be the most statist in the known universe: The relationship between that country's government and banking system is so flagrantly and conspicuously incestuous that amorous Appalachian cousins, upon seeing the spectacle, would exclaim in disgust: "Hey, that just ain't right!"

Going up the food chain from Ortseifen we find Ingrid Matthaus-Maier, CEO of the state-owned (and, therefore, unregulated) KfW banking group and a long-time member of the Social Democratic Party. The salary of this champion of social equity is $614,000 a year, all of it paid either directly by the taxpayers or from capital acquired through taxpayer subsidies. In exchange for this relatively modest (by international banking standards) compensation, Matthaus-Maier helped orchestrate the crisis now rippling through the German banking system.

"The state-owned banks are supposed to bail each other out when necessary," comments Der Spiegel, "but the problem is that many are in trouble themselves and hardly in a position to help their peers." Germany's "public-sector banks speculated far more heavily than private banks in American subprime mortgage securities. Now these banks' beleaguered executives are calling on the government to bail them out from a disaster of their own making."

O.K. -- by a show of hands, how many of you are surprised by this? Just one? Oh, right -- it's Hannity again, who's always the dullest implement in the cutlery drawer. (Just go sit in the corner, Sean, and tend to your finger-painting, 'kay?)

Matthaus-Maier and Ortseifen "are perfect examples of the fatal mix of amateurism, greed and political protection that is symptomatic of Germany's state-owned, partially state-owned and public-sector banks," observes Der Spiegel. "It is an environment that can only thrive in the shadow of the state" -- and has drained scores of billions of dollars from the public treasury. "

Once again, I wish to underscore the fact that these people were part of the parasite class -- State employees (the word "workers" doesn't apply) and executives of State-supported institutions. Their actions have destroyed huge amounts of confiscated wealth.

But they're not the real criminals -- or so we are urged to believe. The real criminals, again, are those like Klaus Zumwinkel, "tax evaders" ("tax refugees" is a more honest term) who did what they could to protect their earnings from the confiscatory, punitive tax system that kept statist drones like Ortseifen knee-deep in strudel and strumpets.

Zumwinkel's arrest comes as a result of an operation carried out by the German Federal Intelligence Service (BND). A few years ago, the BND had a "walk-in" by a disgruntled ex-employee of Liechtenstein's LGT Group, a financial institution that specializes in setting up the type of foundations often used by German tax refugees. The spitzel offered the BND a CD-ROM containing data on German banking clients.

That information was proprietary, privileged, and protected by law. The individual who offered the CD-ROM to German intelligence was trafficking in stolen property. So the German spooks, pillars of Teutonic rectitude that they were, refused to accept it -- right?

Uh, yeah, right. And you'll probably believe that there's never been an escape from Stalag 13.

To purchase that stolen information, the BND shelled out $7.3 million in funds taken at gunpoint from German citizens, including Zumwinkel and others whose data was found on the CD-ROM.

"The German government has used tax money to pay for a crime by a citizen of Lichtenstein," protested attorney Ferdinand von Schirach, a citizen of that stalwart Apline principality. "That's illegal."

Hans-Adam II, Lichtenstein's ruling prince (who is on record as saying that a tax rate in excess of six percent is "tyrannical"), quite properly condemned the crime as an "attack" on his country. Subverting Lichtenstein's laws and invading its institutions "does not solve the problems [Germany] has with its taxpayers," the prince correctly observed.

Like Switzerland and Luxembourg, Lichtenstein's banking secrecy laws date back to the 1930s, a time -- like the one nigh on arrival, I'm afraid -- of global depression, ubiquitous socialist tyranny, and incipient world war. Those countries provided a safe haven for the assets of German Jews. And then, as now, those havens were denounced by German collectivists, both "right" and "left," for offering refuge to those seeking to escape "social justice" as conceived and implemented by Berlin.

"It's simply unacceptable to have tax havens in Europe that encourage capital flight and incite tax fraud," belched Ronald Pofalla, a high-ranking member of the German Conservative Union, at a Berlin press conference. "We must ensure that such refuges are shut."

Although the account I read was silent as to whether that last phrase was accompanied with a stiff-armed, stiff-handed salute, that gesture would have been appropriate in the context.

The flag of a free country:
Liechtenstein's national banner. Like Switzerland, the heroic Alpine nation has not bent the knee to Ba'al by joining the European Union, and it permits productive people to keep their financial affairs hidden from the Argus-eyed monstrosity called "government."

German Chancellor Angela Merkel insists that Liechtenstein must revise its banking laws to make them more permeable by German authorities, and insists that the principality's
"reputation is at stake" on its response to that demand. I don't know what the culture-specific equivalent of an upthrust middle finger would be, but whatever it is I hope that Liechtenstein's response could be summarized as such.

Once again, Merkel and Pofalla are described as conservatives. And from their perspective, "capital flight" is best addressed by prosecuting the productive -- such as Zumwinkel -- rather than purging the parasites, of whom Ortseifen and Matthaus-Meier are typical.

And rather than cleaning out the State-abetted corruption and cronyism in Germany's banking system, Merkel's government is staging a propaganda spectacle intended to make tax refugees the scapegoats for that nation's coming depression.

It's worth studying these developments in Germany, if only to catch a glimpse of how things will soon play out over here as well.

UPDATE: Parasites and informants of the world, unite!

Apparently the Brits drive a better bargain than the Germans when dealing for stolen banking information: They only paid the snitch 100,000 pounds for information on 100 British citizens who used the same bank in Liechtenstein to protect their wealth from Britain's esurient tax laws.

The Sunday Times of London offers some additional details regarding the source of this illegally obtained private information:

"The suspected whistleblower, accused of stealing data from the bank, was sacked and convicted of fraud. He also offered data to tax authorities in America, Canada, Australia and France."

OK, we have to do a little semantic housekeeping here.

A "whistleblower" is someone who, at personal risk, defies threats and pressure from corrupt superiors in order to reveal corruption, incompetence, and/or criminal wrongdoing. This guy is a disgruntled ex-employee and convicted criminal, not a "whistleblower." The bank he worked for did nothing illegal under the enlightened and commendable laws of its country.

Granted, the governments that afflict other nations don't like Liechtenstein's laws, but that's just hard cheese.

It's going to be exceptionally interesting to see what use, if any, our own Leviathan makes of this stolen information.


Liberty In Eclipse is on sale now at The Right Source.

Dum spiro, pugno!


Anonymous said...

Quite simply... governmental thieves "want it all". The little man, or the intelligent who seek to preserve what they have worked so hard for, are made to take the fall for the biggest mafias known to man, i.e. government.

zach said...

Wonderfully penetrating article. There is a main-stream article out of the San Fran Chronicle that you might find interesting Will. It's called "Rule of Law, or Rule by Fear." Pretty freaky if you ask me. What are they up to? Just making money I hope?

Anonymous said...

In my own search for personal understanding of the circumstances we commonly refer to as government I've gone through many personally used epitaphs to describe the 'ruling class'. Statist, socialist, fascist all failed in some fundamental way to fully encompass what I was witnessing. Eventually, I too use the word 'parasite' to describe these misbegotten elements of society because it is the most accurate scientific term available. I have used it in a couple prior comments to your blog (and though I am pleased to see you see fit to use it also, wouldn't presume to feel I may have influenced that choice of words).

I do, however, think it is appropriate to reflect a moment on that well chosen choice of words as I feel it most is a most accurate descriptive word for anyone with their snout in the tax trough.

Science often attempts to classify observations based on attributes and when one steps back to look at the relationship to those in government (that's anyone getting a pay check from a government agency) and the remainder of society one is naturally led to the parasite/host relationship.

In biology, we know that there are beneficial parasitic organisms and there are detrimental organisms. But even the beneficial ones, when their existence is detrimental to the host, generate one of two possible outcomes; the host suffers/dies or the parasites are eliminated. Our relationship to our current governance is at this crossroad and we have to decide - are we a parasite or a host and which will prevail.

The very nature of government is to obfuscate its actions by so many layers of bureaucracy that even (especially?) those who are the ones to implement its machinations can not see it. Those parasitic people now outnumber the hosts of this pathological society. If they are not eliminated, the host dies. If the host retaliates it will be weakened and may die. However, if the host survives purging itself of its parasitic infestation it may survive to enjoy its existence a bit longer than it would have.

That is our dilemma . . . eliminate the parasites, either remove or destroy them, or die . . .

Anonymous said...

The infrastructure is crumbling _ roads full of potholes and cracks- yet the state police, DOT and various other government agencies are always seen driving around in the newest brands of vehicles decked out with cutting edge high tech gear. Increasingly I feel as though we are living in a third world country. When will the madness and financial blood sucking end. There is very little left to take. The USA reminds me of the turkey served for dinner in National Lampoon's Christmas vacation. Looking good on the outside but scratch below the surface and what is their ... a hollow empty carcass. The only thing left to export from this country are our raw resources - timber/oil/ metals. How far this great nation has fallen.

John Polomny said...

I realized many years ago, during my Naval service, that the state views me as a milk cow to be used at it sees fit. My view since has been to internationialize myself as much as possible. Citizenship in one country, my investments in another, a crib outside the US, and a bank account in dare I say, a tax haven. Since the US has become a national security state, for our safety of course, I fully suspect that when the crap hits the fan (terror attack, economic dislocation, will of the next Nero) they are going to lock this place down like one of their rendition sites. If you aint got out by then you aint gettin out. It always pays to be prepared. Another outstanding article.

dixiedog said...

Very good Will. I agree with your take on the matter, but I think you, perhaps inadvertently, omit certain facts about the people involved in government. After all, government is an entity made up of people who likewise live in the state in question.

Has it occurred to anyone that a majority of the commoners these days drink from the public trough? That's NOT merely a naked assertion. Once again (like it really needs repeating...sigh), but some just don't grok it, apparently: Government is an approximate mirror reflection of the aggregate society. It's not a precise reflection, but how precise does it need to be to see the dichotomy of a "love" "loathe" government relationship that MOST folk harbor? How do we logically expect that we can somehow, miraculously if you will, trim down the reach of government when so many commoners are desiring to expand it, despite their collective claims to the contrary??

Nonsense. Illogical. It can't and won't happen.

It's not that there are a tiny ravenous quantity of parasites that merely need to be innoculated against, but rather there are huge quantity of ravenous parasites, a majority of the population, instead. As for hosts, if there's not a "tiny," certainly it's a small, quantity of those hapless souls.

Good rant, Will, but we have to take into account and expose the entire picture of what's really happenin', even if it's PAINFUL to do so, if there's to be any hope of a radical change. Freedom doesn't just grow on trees or simply transpire out of thin air by bunch of idealistic youngsters screaming "Freeeeeeeeeeeeeedom!" Sigh...NO!

THE commoners themselves have to want it (REALLY WANT IT!), that is the accountability and responsibility attendant to it, for true freedom to be workable in society.

I suspect you well know the reality, Will, but nevertheless, sometimes I think your message seems to try to paint "government" and "the people" as somehow hostile entities to one another.

NO! NO! Heck NO! If only that WERE true, we would see a sea change in government quick time.

Of course, I could be misreading your inferences, but that's largely what I infer often from your varied pieces.

Anonymous said...

Sixty-three years after the war ended, Germany remains an occupied nation. It presents a facade of national sovereignty. Yet its territory (Ramstein air force base) serves as a base for U.S. aggression; its armed forces are goaded into the NATO mission in Afghanistan despite popular opposition; and, Germany subserviently joined the US/UK-initiated War on Tax Havens.

Dixiedog has got it right: by promoting the brazen lie that every employee has an 'account' with Social Security, the evil genius Frank Roosevelt transformed the MAJORITY of the population overnight into swillers at the public trough. It will be exceedingly difficult after three generations to remove this poisoned chalice. The involuntary intervention of national bankruptcy is probably the only way.

Today's conventional wisdom that 'democracy' is the ne plus ultra of political systems is deeply flawed. In fact, democracy coupled with an elastic fiat currency is a sure prescription for disaster. Its powerful incentives to imprudence guarantee eventual ruin. Too bad the failed 'science' of economics is unable to diagnose this fatal malady.

Anonymous said...

I certainly agree with your article, but I still have to add, that I can't feel too much pity towards Zumwinkel.
He is/was good buddies with the political class and recently supported and pushed a bill enacting a minimum wage (12-14$ per hour depending on the region) for postal services to protect the monopoly of the Deutsche Post in this sector.

Anonymous said...

I have to disagree with Dixiedog's assertion that real meaningful change is 'Nonsense. Illogical. It can't and won't happen.' If that were the case, this country would still be a British colony. However, enough of the 'right people', not necessarily a majority (there were many supporters of the crown during the first revolution), need to be willing to commit that change.

One of the ways we have available to us is to use the tactics of those we oppose - starting with language - against them. There was a time in this country when bureaucrats were rightly looked down on in society as parasites, a time when the constabulary was required to walk the streets and know the people and a time when government recognized that it was a beggar class. They weren't public servants and they weren't lionized.

Using language to change the culture is a start and calling these people parasites, as they are, is a good way to start.

dixiedog said...

anonymous says I said this: Dixiedog's assertion that real meaningful change is 'Nonsense. Illogical. It can't and won't happen.'

...and he disagrees with that. Fine, but at the very least quote the totality of what I said.

For instance, you certainly didn't quote anything remotely even resembling what I wrote other than the "Nonsense..." phrase:

How do we logically expect that we can somehow, miraculously if you will, trim down the reach of government when so many commoners are desiring to expand it, despite their collective claims to the contrary??

Nonsense. Illogical. It can't and won't happen.

Now, that's what I wrote, NOT "real meaningful change is..." To put what I said in a different, but similar, context: Does one act in opposition to his boss, or otherwise does what he pleases, while simultaneously demanding he get his paycheck? Nah, Of course not. He might try it and he's fired (no more income).

So there's a clear dichotomy between those, a majority of the populace, who claim to "loathe" government, while at THE SAME TIME are essentially parasites, to various degrees, receiving some kind of government income, either from working for government directly, as a contractor indirectly, or simply receiving a subsidy in some form, i.e. farmers, et al.

For yet another example, a kid can't demand his/her allowance from her parents while he/she likewise rebels against daddy and his rules. He/she can rather expect to receive no allowance.

That's what's illogical. Is it clearer, anonymous? Perhaps, you can see what I'm sayin' now.

Anonymous said...

You make a lot of good points. However, if every German were to decide which laws apply to him, and which ones don't, all hell would break loose. Instead of defending Zumwinkel, why not argue that the Germans need to drop their pie in the sky conceptions of economics and adopt laws that actually help their country.

William N. Grigg said...

steve, thanks for your comments.

As to which laws we are morally obliged to obey -- the law "thou shalt not steal" is one of universal and unqualified application. Who is stealing here -- the honest man who accumulates wealth, or the government that plunders half or more of an honest man's earnings, and its retinue of parasites?

This situation is one Bastiat addressed, and I'll try to paraphrase what I think his reaction would be to the non-crime of tax "evasion":

When the law has become perverted, it is not the moral obligation of citizens to accommodate it. Rather, it is the moral obligation of the government to bring its enactments into harmony with the law (using that expression in its proper sense).

Tax "evasion" is the natural and morally healthy reaction of citizens to a regime that behaves just as you describe: It picks and chooses which laws it will follow in order to enrich some at the expense of others.

That is the variety of anarchy that does most of the real damage in the world.

If people meekly submit to that variety of lawless government, no useful changes will ever result. It may be imprudent to do as Zumwinkel and others have done, I grant, just as the same can be said of "tax resisters" in this country (given our heritage, shouldn't all of us be tax resisters of one form or another?). But I can't see how trying to keep what one has honestly earned is immoral.

Fabio Bossi said...

Please Americans, elect Ron Paul and save us again!
We won`t achieve it on our own. Germans don`t even know anymore what the word "freedom" means.

Cheerio from Munich


liberranter said...

Anonymous said:

The only thing left to export from this country are our raw resources - timber/oil/ metals. How far this great nation has fallen.

Don't forget stupidity, the most plentiful (if least marketable) of all American exports.

Fabio Bossi said:

Germans don`t even know anymore what the word "freedom" means.

From my extensive travels in that country, as well as encounters with Germans here in Amerika, I'm hard pressed to believe that the average German would recognize "freedom" if it bite them in the nose. Germany has ALWAYS been a regimented, regulated society and the average German's outlook on the State, and the individual's (to the extent that Germans recognize the individual as significant at all) relationship to it reflects this.

Anonymous said...

Czechs seem to regard their government as a mildly tractable, infinitely gullible, only occaisionally useful cow, one which could sometimes be coaxed into giving milk but which was mostly best left alone. Dim beast, that, with poor eyesight and an uncertain temper. Those folks lived with the Soviets for thirty years; they -remember- where all this nonsense leads. The police are an amiable combination of lazy, underpaid, and corrupt, with a leavening of a few serious pros to handle the few truly difficult cases. Nobody waves their casual breaking of the law in the cops' faces, and they don't make themselves more offensive than to fish for a bribe on occasion. To be labeled an informer is always trouble, doubly so since becoming an informer over there means crossing not only some pretty nasty people, but total ostracism from the community. Accordingly, turncoats are few, and mostly limited to the nasty folks aforementioned; organized crime figures and the like. The Roma, of course, -never- talk to cops. About anything.

I lived in Prague from August of '06 to August of '07. It was a tremendous eye-opener: a sickening irony that in what was once an Iron Curtain nation, everyday life is vastly freer from lethal and inconvenient harassment by the State. Surveillance cameras in the Metro, for instance, are the constant targets of vandalism and pranks, take months to be replaced, and are not watched anyway since the various Police Departments can't spare the manpower. People over there aren't afraid of the Police all the time, as in the US, and on the rare occaisions when the Czech cops -do- overreact (as in the infamous case of CzechTek, a Techno festival broken up with riot police) heads roll. The CzechTek incident helped fire a Prime Minister, which in turn left the country without a functioning Federal-level government for seven months. Country got on just fine. The rest of the E.U. thought it was a joke; the Czechs thought it was a bargain. They seemed to think that paying politicians to sit at home and do nothing was at least a workable alternative to paying them to actually -do- something. Their concerns seemed mostly to revolve around keeping this or that party or individual from doing "something" about this issue or that (notably American anti-missile radars), and paying the buggers to sit home and sleep late was starting to look like a neat means of accomplishing this.

We have lawyer jokes? They have cop jokes, and a more abusive, profane, satirical, embarassing magnificent body of humour you will not find.

Magnificent country. Getting back to the U.S. has been a nasty culture shock. Same thing happened when I came back from Ireland.

I wonder if it's a pattern?

Anonymous said...

Will, I like your reference to Bastiat. He was a man of uncommon observation and an ability to put his thoughts to words. We could use a few like him in our time, and yes Ron Paul is probably such a man in my humble opinion.

Unfortunately, we are creatures of the economics of scarcity. All competing for the greatest amount of resources with the least amount of effort (and I think that is true of all of us, myself included, it is the nature of humanity). What tilts the natural balance is government attempting to manipulate our interactions - which only amplifies the underlying 'greed' motive. And none amongst our species are worse in their greed motive than those who wear the official government label . . .

Anonymous said...

People are supposed to pay their taxes. If you think they are too high, then go live some where else, or vote for someone who will reduce them. Secretly funneling your money out of the country to avoid paying your taxes is illegal. Zumwinkel may have done a good job with Deutsche Post, but that does not allow him to break the law. If he was not willing to pay that much tax, then he should have quit the job and gone to work for Liechtenstein's postal service.

I agree with your criticism regarding IKB. The problem with todays managers seems to be that they cash in large pay checks, dividends, pensions etc.; but are not held accountable for their mistakes, when they make them. For example the whole sub-prime thing. Your criticism regarding the state is exaggerated. The people in charge of the state and semi-state owned corporations belong to the same political elite that the manager come from. You Americans should know that by now. Rumsfeld and co all held or now hold positions in large corporations.

I'm aware that on the other side of the Atlantic you like to engage in socialist bashing, but it doesn't address the issue. There seems to be an alarming lack of responsibility in manager elites across the globe. It is not an ailment of a rampantly socialist Germany - we like to call it social capitalism. Your predatory capitalism has the same, if not worse issues.

Regarding your fervent anti-statism. It almost sounds anarchist-like, and they are on the left. State control is a necessity. Somalia is what you get when a state collapses. Irresponsible management is what you get when the state doesn't make sure that people are held accountable for their actions.

Anonymous said...

No somalia is what you get when you have a central govt. that is rife with corruption and cronyism. (the two are basically symbiotic)

Anonymous said...

Well said!
My man, you gave me goose pimples!
Everything within the state; nothing outside the state; nothing against the state.
I.....I.... love you.
Seig heil.

-Benito Hess-Gramsci

Rick said...

"People are supposed to pay their taxes."

No. Because taking a person's property against their will is theft.
Therefore, taxes are theft. No one is supposed to cooperate with evil.
On the contrary, you are supposed to oppose evil.

dixiedog said...

Somalia is what you get when a state collapses.

Have you ever heard of self-government, sebastian? Somalis have no record of self-government and so the result is predictable when no State is keeping the commoners in line, just as it would be with any society without a moral foundation and its attendant rule of law. Ergo, Somalia is what you get when you have rudderless culture without a State to provide that rudder, however arbitrary and secular that "rudder" may be.

Irresponsible management is what you get when the state doesn't make sure that people are held accountable for their actions.

By what you have said, it's obviously clear that you believe that folk cannot possibly be able to understand right and wrong without the State being the arbiter for that judgment.

You are a moral relativist and that's not surprising in the least, mind you, as most folk over here these days are also moral relativists and need (indeed require) a State authority to tell them which action is the "RIGHT" action and which is the "WRONG" one. Sad, sad...

It bothers me that commoners today look not to God, His Word, their own intuition, but rather to a government advisory, policy, or regulation - whether it pertains to weather, law, taxes, behavior, etc. - to guide how they will behave and conduct their lives. However, as I mentioned earlier, when so many folk get a large portion or all of their bread from government, the odds that they will act in defiance, even when called for, is slim to none.

IMHO, I think that's what Will may be overlooking in these matters.

Anonymous said...

Dear Will,

If this was Japan I would write to whichever state employee is in charge of those things, and nominate you as a Living National Cultural Treasure. A wonderful essay, as always, and a most impressive forum of commentators.

Might I suggest a name for these public employees? Here it is: (Webster's New World Dictionary....)LEECH: "2. Any of a number of bloodsucking worms living in water or wet earth and used in medicine, esp. in former times, to bleed patients. 3.A person who clings to another to get some gain out of him; a parasite. 4. In medicine, a suction apparatus for drawing blood.

Come every April 15, I certainly feel lightheaded as if drained of blood and life energy, when I read my tax return and see how much these leeches have sucked from me to fund the mass murder of Iraqi children, the torture of taxi drivers and schoolteachers, the assassination of leaders duly elected and chosen by other groups of people, the economic subjection of billions of people all over the world, the destruction of our entire planet, and so on and on.

Actually, I suppose, given such enormous and impressive achievements, government is giving me quite a LOT for my rather limited monetary "contributions."

No - they do not take from us, we "contribute" to them and the purposes they have chosen for us, such as destruction of the planet we live on. Which is another of their talents - doublespeak. I remember many years ago when I got my very first parking ticket in life, and it read: "Opportunity To Pay a Fixed Penalty." As in, if I chose not to avail myself of this "opportunity" they were offering me, I could argue it before a judge and pay even more, plus court costs. Today, I really wish I had kept a Xerox copy of that ticket, but back then I was too young to appreciate the irony of it.

I would like to respond to "Dixiedog" who said: "Has it occurred to anyone that a majority of the commoners these days drink from the public trough?" This is true, but it is all part of the intentional design. Drain the people of all intiative by making them eternal infants, and encouraging them to suckle forever at the tit of government largesse. Make them into everlasting babies, carried everywhere in the strong arms of the State, and warned that trying to stand on their own two feet and take a step for themselves will result in falls and painful bruises. Yes, the majority have fallen for it. They want the State do look after them forever. But the State cannot. Remember 9-11? Remember Katrina? Tornadoes? Wildfires? Floods? Where was the State then? Nowhere. The victims suddenly had to stand alone, and did not like it.

I like the word "leech." Considering that leeches are blind, slimy creatures, live in fetid stinking swamps, and suck human blood, this pretty well describes them.

Best wishes,
Chris Taylor,
Arlington, VA

PS: The photo of Sgt.Schultz was marvelous. Why don't you send a copy to our poor hero Herr Zumwinkel. He could probably use a laugh right now.

Anonymous said...

Excellent post, as usual.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Tax evasing was conceived by jews ("their" money were stolen from simple people)and for jews there are no laws, no moral, they could do everything, every crime, but other peple couldn't!

Cheney Cooled Storage said...

They are in power. They have the power, so, there is nothing we can do.