Why Do Gunners Oppose Universal Background Checks?

Tom Sheppard

5/4/2020

Supporters of the Second Amendment, often referred to as “gunners” or pro-gun rights advocates, often come out in opposition to a common-sense gun reform called universal background checks.  

Why?

As a law-abiding gun owner the term “universal background check” seems to mean, you check the background of every gun owner to make sure they aren’t criminals or mental defectives.  After all, no one wants to be “that guy” who sold a gun to the whack-o who killed a bunch of children at some school.

So, why would anyone oppose universal background checks?

To understand the resistance, we need to pull back the covers on this particular bed and see the little bed bugs crawling around between the covers waiting to bite us.

Those supporting this common-sense gun reform are often referred to as anti-gun, anti-gunners, gun-banners, or just banners.  This various names reflect the belief that those supporting gun control laws have as their ultimate aim the banning of all gun ownership by private individuals.  

To be fair, not everyone lumped into the gun-ban group wants that.  Regardless of the benign motives some of some gun-control advocates, history definitively shows that preventing the general populace from having access to weapons is a generally effective method of ensuring that they cannot overthrow a government, no matter how corrupt, predatory, or despotic it may be.  

Ancient history shows that feudal lords maintained power over their subjects and their serfs, despite their despotism, because they could afford arms and armor. If they found a peasant with an unauthorized sword or armor they killed him or her.  One of the privileges of being knighted was the freedom to carry a sword anytime you wanted.

In more recent times, the American Revolution got kick started when British troops marched from Boston to Concord with the intent to confiscate guns and ammunition being stored there by the colonial militia. The British wanted to confiscate these weapons and ammunition in order to keep the colonists under the rule of King George.

Modern history has also shown that first controlling, and then confiscating private firearms has been effectively used by several despotic regimes to control their populace.  One of the best know examples is Nazi Germany.  However, this also is a hallmark of the Soviet Union, Castro in Cuba, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, and Chavez in Venezuela.

For many gunners, nearly any gun-control law is seen as part of the slippery slope that leads to gun confiscation.  Because of that, some gunners reflexively oppose universal background checks as part of that slippery slope.

I consider myself a reasonable person.  I try to see things from viewpoints other than my own and recognize that at times, I might be guilty of being short-sighted or reactionary.  When I first heard the term universal background check for gun purchases, I thought it sounded reasonable and was supportive of the notion.  As I continued to see strong opposition to it from some other gun owners, I decided to look a little closer to see why some seemed so adamantly opposed.

Universal background check laws are designed expand the existing requirements beyond commercial firearms sales to regulate 100% of private firearms exchanges.  By private, I mean between you and your cousin, you and your neighbor, and even your yard sale (or classified ad sale).

Today, there are both federal and state laws which heavily regulate the sale and transfer of firearms handled by licensed firearm dealers.  To buy a gun from a gun store or manufacturer, whether in their storefront or at a gun show, you have to pass a federal background check.  This sort of transaction is what most of us are thinking about when we hear the term universal background check.

Universal, in this case, really means universal. 

Universal background checks would make you a felon if you gave a gun to your brother or to your adult child.  It would make it a felony for an estate to allow heirs to inherit firearms from their parents.  In both cases, the transfer of the gun cannot occur without the execution of a federal or state (or both) background check.  This is true even if the firearm is an antique flintlock that no longer works but which has been handed down through your family since Revolutionary War days.

Not only is it incredibly intrusive to authorize the government to get in the middle of private, non-commercial, firearm transfers it also sets an incredibly horrible precedent for our economic freedoms in general.

If the government can make you a felon for giving away a gun, or selling it to someone you know, without first going through the government for clearance, they can make you a criminal for anything and everything you sell or give away.

The Yard-Sale Felony Caper

In most neighborhoods during the Spring and Fall in most parts of the US on any given weekend you can find dozens of yard sales, garage sales, and “tag” sales happening throughout your town.  Maybe you have hosted more than one yourself.  Probably, you have visited more than one.

In many cases the adage applies that the difference between a yard sale and garbage collection is how close the items are placed to the curb.  Regardless of this, often one person’s trash is another’s treasure.

Now, imagine that some agent of the Internal Revenue Service is tasked with showing up at each yard sale, monitoring the transactions and making sure that not only are sales taxes collected on each sale, but the transfers themselves are recorded and your yard sale earnings are properly recorded for reporting on your income tax.  And, if you aren’t doing all that at your yard sale, that government agent simply calls the police who come to your yard sale, arrest you and all your family who are helping in the sale, and then confiscating all the stuff you were trying to sell.

You and every member of your family are now economic criminals.  Because this involved federal taxes, you are now indicted felons.  When you get convicted – and you will be convicted because you were blatantly guilty – you are now convicted felons.  Even if you never serve a day in jail your life and that of each member of your family are now changed forever.

Note: If you can afford a good lawyer, you might manage to avoid getting convicted.  If you can't afford a good lawyer, then kiss your "law abiding citizen" moniker goodbye forever.  You are going to become just another felon.  Your public defender is unlikely to prevent this.

As a convicted felon you will never be able to hold a job anywhere in the financial sector, at all.  No bank, insurance company, or finance company can hire you because you cannot be bonded – insured against financial misconduct.  And that is just the tip of the iceberg.  Just ask any convicted felon how hard it is to find a really good job, or any job, after they get out of jail.  One reason for criminal recidivism is that it is incredibly difficult for a convicted criminal to ever make an honest living.  Your yard sale did this to you, and to all your children as well.  That felony will follow them for the rest of their lives.

Universal tax collection, like universal background checks makes millions of ordinary citizens into criminals.  Even today economists refer to the “gray market” and the “black market” economic activities within the US and other countries.  The gray markets are un-taxed transfers of legal goods between private individuals in non-commercial quantities.  The black market is based on either commercial volumes of business of lawful goods, or when the products are illegal.

I know this yard-sale-felony scenario sounds crazy.  However, it is a logical next step after the government turns your Uncle into a felon for giving you your great grandfather’s pistol without first registering the transfer with the government and running a background check on you.

I believe that the common-sense gun reform of universal background checks is a nice sounding wrapper on a big candy-coated bar of dung.  Currently we have both federal and state laws which require licensing for firearms dealers, and which require them to run background checks on everyone who buys a gun from them.  Common sense says that is universal enough.  Extending the requirement for background checks to private, non-commercial gifting, inheriting, or sale of guns is not common-sense, and it will inevitably lead to much worse things.

FYI- According to the laws today you are supposed to report the money you earn from your yard sale along with your other income on your tax returns.  However, today there aren't any federal agents looking to lock you up for failing to report the $532.18 you recouped for selling your old junk, outgrown clothes, and that ready to did lawn mower you sold at your last yard sale.

See Tom's political views on Facebook at:  https://www.facebook.com/TomSheppardPoliticalViews/
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

Global Warming and the Scam Artists

Tom Sheppard

4/21/2020

Global warming is real. It created the English Channel about 15,000 years ago.

For years now we have been hearing lots about Global Warming.  We hear about it from politicians, scientists, and activists.  The main thrust of the rhetoric is that the world temperature is rising which will melt the glaciers and ice caps and raise sea levels dramatically.

We have known for many decades that the world temperature is increasing.  Way back in the 1970's when I was in Middle School my Earth Science class discussed the recent ending of a "Little Ice Age" (about 250 years from 1300 to 1850 AD) which came on the heels of the "Medieval Warm Period" (a 300 hundred year warm spell from 950 to 1250 AD). The chief symptom of the emergence from the Little Ice Age was the retreat of glaciers in the mountains of the world, such as those in Glacier National Park, not far from where I was born.

What is so different now than it was in the 1970's is that instead of being viewed as a wholly natural occurrence, the global temperature change is being attributed largely to man-made causes. Those who believe in human-caused global warming appear very willing and ready to silence anyone who suggests an alternate view.  This intolerant approach to science is wholly at odds with what is espoused in the scientific method and smacks more of politics or religious zealotry than science.

The geological evidence shows that the earth has a 100,000 year long-weather cycle that changes due to variations in the orbit of the Earth around the Sun.  These cyclical changes are referred to as Milankovitch Cycles, and were first identified back in the 1920's.

The orbit of the Earth around the Sun varies from a circular to mildly elliptical shape.  The elliptical orbit results in longer, colder winters, and shorter, cooler summers.  The net effect is a significant cooling of the temperature and the creation of massive ice sheets which cover large portions of both the land and sea.  An ice age.

In the waters East of the British Isles lies a raised area of seabed known as the Dogger Bank.  Fishermen have pulled up evidences that this area was once dry land.  Geologists say this was much more extensive than just a small land bridge connecting the British Isles to the mainland of Europe.  Instead, that whole area was dry land which was gradually submerged as sea levels rose as much as 300 feet due to the melting of ice at the end of the last ice age. They believe that the English Channel came into existence as little as 8,000 to as much as 15,000 years ago.  That is a pretty dramatic change in geography, driven by a dramatic, but gradual change in the climate which lifted sea levels by as much as 300 feet, up to current levels.

This short video (about 8 minutes) explains part of what happened:  

            https://youtu.be/mzLFZBb-n5U

This much longer video (one of three) about the formation of the British Isles gives even more information on these massive climate changes and how they have shaped the world we know today.  They point out that at one point, what is now Southern England was a tropical world and a savanna at different times.

             https://youtu.be/nvk6DUmTuvE

According to the 100,000 year climate cycle, the last full ice age ended about 11,700 years ago. Simple math suggests that we are nearly 40,000 years away from the next peak in global temperatures.  This means we can expect the polar caps and glaciers to keep melting and the oceans to keep rising until earth reaches its temperature peak in about 40,000 years.  After that time, temperatures will begin to drop for another 50,000 years until the next ice age peaks.

All this dramatic and massive climate change is driven by the orbit of the Earth, not by humanity,.

The next time someone says that "the science is settled" on climate change, you may want to pin them down on exactly what they mean. The science of long-term climate change, driven by nature is certainly very settled. In contrast, the "science" of man-made climate change is anything but settled. In fact, in light of geo-history, I suggest that the notion of man-made climate change is just spitting into the wind.

The belief that we can stop this environmental cycle which has been going on for millions of years, or that we can stop the current trend which has been going on for just over 10,000 years is silly. The global warming alarmists preach that by bankrupting the world and making the poor even poorer (and the rich richer) we can stop a trend that began long before Henry Ford made a car is nothing more or less than a con job designed to siphon off billions (or trillions) of dollars into the pockets of elitists posing as the environmentally conscious.

Many people like to believe that science and scientists are immune to the profit motive.  Such a view is naive and in complete denial of thousands of years of recorded human history showing the nature of humankind.  Scientists, just like anyone else, enjoy creature comforts, security, and prestige.  Their money comes from being able to snag research grants for their work and their universities or institutions.  By creating a panic around global warming, these climatologists stand to reap windfalls of staggering proportions for many decades to come.  In the end, it won't matter if they are wrong, the money will already be spent.

Government research grants are your and my tax dollars.  In short, they are taking money out of your pocket and mine to pay themselves.  The Green New Deal and other extreme political measures and tax plans are nothing more or less than scams designed to turn your and my money into their money.  Wealth transfer is the fancy name for this sort of legalized robbery.  The plans will consolidate power into the hands of a very few, very well compensated government officials and turn the rest of us into their subjects and servants.  Our lives will be lived solely for the good of the state and our own dreams and aspirations will be considered heretical or seditious thinking.

I have no doubt that some who read this article will label me a "climate change denier."  The truth is far less black and white.  I wholly believe in climate change.  I wholly disbelieve in man-made climate change.  Just because mankind can use machines and explosives to make a big pile of rock and dirt doesn't mean I believe they can build a new Mount Everest.  Likewise, although I know that mankind can pollute their environment and make it inhospitable for ourselves, I don't believe all our industrial might can make any measurable or appreciable change in weather cycles which have been at work since long before woolly mammoths ceased to roam the land.

If the global warming fanatics would pause in their attempts to burn all the heretics they might find that someone has a better model that can actually show how much, or how little, we can affect these trends.  My belief is that the changes we can make are only at the margins.  We would be far better off to figure out how we can adapt to a changing world where ocean levels are likely to rise for the next 40,000 years, instead of trying to stop something that is truly bordering on a cosmic event.

When I hear the global warming alarmists, I hear in their voices the same tones I find in the calls of carnival hucksters trying to get me to put my money on a rigged game.  It is the same tone you hear in the voice of the expert confidence artist who swindles you, or your aging parents, out of thousands all to either get rich quick, or to protect you from some non-existent danger.  Anyone who believes what these hucksters are selling about how we can stop it should feel embarrassed that they were ever taken in by such a patently absurd scam. It only goes to show that P.T. Barnum was right. "There's a sucker born every minute."

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

What if God Stopped COVID-19 Today?

Photo cover detail from Godvernment by Tom Sheppard (C) Copryright Thomas K Sheppard

Tom Sheppard

4/10/2020

Today is Good Friday.  The day Christians celebrate as the time when Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled his mission by atoning for the sins of the world, was crucified, and on the following Sunday (Easter) rose from the dead to begin the resurrection of mankind preparatory to them being recalled into the presence of God for judgement.

Not coincidentally, this is also the weekend when Jews celebrate the Passover.  Remembering how God killed the first born of all Egypt to punish them for not letting the Israelites depart, while passing over every Israelite houshold that smeared the blood of the sacrificial lamb above their door.

Egypt was afflicted with several plagues before this final, terrible visitation brought death into nearly every household.  The death of the first-born hit the house of Pharoah as well as that of the slaves and everyone in between.

Today, we are all feeling a bit like the Egyptians.

As of this writing, COVID-19 has claimed 97,292 lives and infected more than 1,623,910 (confirmed) people world-wide.  It has shuttered the economies of nearly every country and inspired the US government to pass a stimulus bill that will have massive tax implications for everyone after this crisis is behind us.  It has also allowed state governments and the Federal government to implement curtailments of our constitutional rights which were unthinkable just a few short months ago.

Today, some localities (Rhode Island) have police and National Guard going door to door searching out potential violators of travel restrictions with orders to forcibly take violators into custody and impose quarantines.

A few months ago, if the Federal or any state government had ordered us to stay at home and taken travel restriction enforcement actions they would have been met with massive protests in the streets.  I mention this not because I think we should be fighting these current restrictions.  I mention this because I fear that now that we have crossed this boundary where our constitutional right to freedom of assembly has been breached and accepted, this will condition the citizens to be more accepting of similar actions in the future which may be motivated by power-grabs instead of genuine public safety.

Today, Russell M. Nelson, President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has asked that all who are able fast and pray for relief from this plague.  This is not just for the 16 million members of his church.  It includes an appeal to all people of faith.  He solicits our prayers for those infected, the medical professionals caring for them, the scientists trying to stop it, and for our economies.  He asks God to stop this plague, if it is His will.

I wonder what would happen if God decided to stop this plague in its tracks?  What if, in an instant, the virus simply shut down?  How would the world react?  Would they thank God, seeing it as a miracle?  Or, would they pin the abrupt cessation on some fluke of cosmic rays?

I suspect that many would credit divine intervention, if it ended so abruptly.  However, if God enlightens the minds of some scientists and guides them to create an effective vaccine, instead of intervening directly what would people say then?

I fear many would overlook the role God plays in revealing things to our minds and guiding us.  Instead, they would simply credit the scientists, claiming that humankind saved itself.

The plague of COVID-19 isn't the worst thing to happen to humanity in the last 100 years.  The worst thing happening to humanity is the failure of their faith in God.  There is no counter which shows how many people in the world are suffering from failing faith and how many have already died spiritually.

God, having engineered humanity and all creation from the ground up is uniquely knowledgeable to cure the Corona Virus.  Having all power he is uniquely able to make changes in the body of every living person and cause the virus to cease to be effective.  In spite of this knowledge and ability many people lack faith.  They don't believe that if God exists that he has any rational motive to do all the good things he can do.  They do not understand that his motives are the same as those of every good parent, because he is literally, not figuratively, our parent.  He is our creator just as our earthly parents are our creators.  He is the father of the spirit that resides in each of us and he is the father of our bodies by virtue of being the father of the bodies of Adam and Eve, our first parents.

If God is a loving parent with the ability to stop all this carnage and suffering, why doesn't he?

Some will wield that question like a sword, trying to disembowel any person of faith.  But, have they really considered the question?

Does good parenting consist of solving all the problems your children have for them, without any effort on their part?  When you see children where that has happened, you see children who are spoiled brats with an overweening attitude of entitlement.  Those children become monsters.

Good parents prepare their children to solve their own problems and leave them the freedom to fail and help them to learn from those failures.

A piercing examination of sacred scriptures from all cultures reveals just such a pattern.  God gives humankind tools, knowledge, and directions.  The scriptures provide anecdotes of people who failed and then learned and of those who failed to learn and perished.  Some scriptural stories are appropriately cautionary.  Others show what can happen when we succeed and subtlety clue us in that success may not be what we think it is.

The COVID-19 plague, like any other disaster I have witnessed, will result in two primary outcomes for those affected.  Some people will seek to take advantage of the chaos to enrich themselves at the expense of others.  The crisis will bring out the worst in them.  Other people will give selflessly, knowing that there is no adequate earthly reward for the service they render others.  The crisis will bring out the best in them.

Will this plague bring out the best in you, or the worst?  You cannot choose whether or not the crisis will affect you.  You can choose how you react to it.

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

 The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

 Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read Godvernment: Government as God

Electing Parents

Photo (c) Rafael Ben-Ari/Chameleons Eye / Depositphotos.com

Tom Sheppard

2/8/2020

Our political elites, both Democratic and Republican, seem to be under the mistaken impression that we voted them to be our elected parents.  Putting them in office because we lack the good sense and judgement to manage our money and other affairs wisely and in our own best interests.

Along those same lines, they seem to assume that being elected officials and political elites automatically makes them somehow smarter than all other citizens.

This sense of being above the rest of us, at least with Congress, is reinforced by their passing laws from which they are exempt.

For instance, the much debated minimum wage requirements don't apply to Congress.  The minimum wage and other mandated employee workplace rights are covered in The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  Congress made themselves exempt from the FLSA.  So, they don't have to pay minimum wage or worry about whether or not an employee is exempt or not exempt from the FLSA, because they made all Congressional employees exempt from the act, regardless of how little they may be paid.

Why is Congress exempt from the FLSA?  Perhaps they felt that being who they are, they would always do the right things by their employees and so, such regulation was unnecessary for them, but just, fair, and right to impose on everyone else.

Don't get me wrong. I am not opposed to the FLSA.  I am opposed to Congress making laws from which they exempt themselves.  If it is good for the rest of the country, then it is good for Congress.  If it is bad for Congress, then it is bad for the rest of the country.  There is no magical dome surrounding the Capitol which causes the laws to behave differently there than elsewhere - except the one erected by Congress.

Another of those regulations that are good for the country, but bad for Congress is the Occupational Safety and Hazards Act (OSHA).  OSHA has subjected countless businesses across the country to inspections and remediation costs, not based on any complaints or accidents, but solely because an OSHA inspector decided to walk into an establishment and assert his or her authority under this act.  But our Congress isn't subject to OSHA, so they will never suffer an unwarranted inspection, fines, and mandatory remediation of workplace safety hazards no matter how many people get hurt in the halls of the Capitol because OSHA might result in frivolous lawsuits against Congress.  Once again, those frivolous suits won't happen to business, only to Congress, so Congress must be exempt from OSHA.  Of course that it utter nonsense.  Laws that are bad for Congress is bad for the country, and laws that are good for the country is good for Congress.

Congress too is exempt from the Affordable Health Care Act (also known as ObamaCare).  Many on Capitol Hill continue to sing the praises of how wonderful this program is for America while they made themselves exempt from the provisions of the act that would have taxed their own "Cadillac Health Care Plan" which they enjoy.

To add insult to injury, Congress is exempt from Social Security.  They don't have to pay Social Security taxes.  And, their retirement plan is to die for.  If you get elected to just two terms as a Representative or just one term as a Senator, and then you retire, you get full pay for life.  With as little as four years or six years on the job our Congress gets to retire at full pay for the rest of their lives.  And they each get six-figure salaries.

Again, don't get me wrong here.  I am not opposed to our Congress getting paid six-figure salaries.  Getting the job requires that they maintain a household in their home state and one in the Washington, DC area.  That is not cheap.  What I object to is them having any retirement plan other than Social Security and an ordinary 401K, like the rest of us can get after working four to six years.

Most corporate retirement plans won't pay you anything if you only work for a company four to six years.

I believe one of the best ways to return our elected officials back into public servants is to deny them any retirement program outside of what is available to ordinary citizens, in other words, Social Security, a 401K, and an IRA.

Some might say, but what about those guys and gals who labor 20 years or more in DC for us?  I say, what about them?  They shouldn't be living off the public for that much time, and when they quit, they should be on their own.  There should be no other retirement plan for elected officials except Social Security and any private investments they make in their 401K or IRA accounts.  Once they leave office, they should no longer be fed at taxpayer expense.

All of these self-directed exemptions from the laws that govern ordinary citizens has the natural effect of making them believe they are an elite for whom the laws don't apply, because they have made that into a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Strip them of the ability to make themselves exempt from the laws they write and they will be in the same regulatory boat as the rest of us.  Strip them of their amazing health plan and make them buy one in the open market.  Strip them of a fat-cat retirement program and make them both pay into Social Security and have to live by what they get from that instead of giving them taxpayer money for life.

If we do that, perhaps we will come a little closer to helping them understand they are us.  They aren't better, smarter, or wiser than us.  We elected them to represent us, not to rule over us.

We elect representatives, not rulers, or parents.

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

 The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

 Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe that Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, thenyou will want to read Godvernment: Government as God

Socialism is Economic Rape

Photo (C) Katarzyna Bialasiewicz photographee.eu / DepositPhotos.com

Tom Sheppard

11/22/2019

When a woman is raped, a man is forcibly taking something from her that she does not want to give him.   The rapist uses his cunning and superior strength to overpower his victim and do as he pleases with her, without any regard to her feelings, hopes, or wants. If she resists, and he is able, he will beat her and restrain her so that she will either be compliant, unconscious, or bound and unable to further resist.

Just like the rapist, a socialist government takes what it wants from its citizens without any regard to their feelings, hopes, or wants.  The socialist government uses the power of its police and military to forcibly take everything it wants and leave its citizens only with what it feels inclined to provide them.  Anyone who is foolish enough to resist the forcible rape is likely to end up in prison or dead.

If you don't believe that socialist governments work this way, then do just two things:

1. Read (or listen to) The Gulag Archipelago by  Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and 
2. Look at what is happening in Venezuela right now as the populace suffers from scarcity brought about by their socialist government while controlling a land of abundance.

That should be enough to make my point, but if it isn't, you can read some history about

• what Adolf Hitler, the head of the National Socialist German Workers (NAZI) party did.  
• Or Pol Pot, the head of the communist Khmer Rouge who took over Cambodia.  
• Or the history of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics where Josef Stalin deliberately slaughtered millions of Russians who didn't embrace his plans with sufficient enthusiasm. 
• Or. follow the adventures of the handsome and charismatic Che Guevara as he tortured and murdered his way across the Caribbean, Central and South America, and Africa trying to 'persuade' people to embrace communism.  Wikipedia notes that "... he murdered political opponents, eliminated the free press, and put homosexuals in forced labor camps."
• Or, read about Che's good friend Fidel Castro and the prisons in Cuba he has filled with political prisoners who didn't agree with his communist/socialist ideas.

Che Guevara

Communism and Socialism

Just as the puma and mountain lion are the same animal, so too are socialism and communism.  Both are rooted in the philosophy explained by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The Communist Manifesto.  The slight difference is that communism actively seeks to do away with all other economic and political orders and run the entire world, while socialism throws nationalism into the mix with the aim of making sure that the socialists from a particular country are all in charge of the world, or at least most of it.

Socialism Must Use Force

Socialism requires that all private resources become owned by or 100% aligned with the purposes of the state.  Very few people will willingly give all they have to government bureaucrats.  Even the leading socialists in the USA today won't do that.  They are hypocrites and liars who don't walk the talk.  That means that the soldiers and police will have to come in to force the compliance of anyone who fails to cooperate and behave as the bureaucrats direct.

When socialists come to power one of the first things they do is they use the coercive power of government to forcibly transfer ownership of many companies and even whole industries from shareholders and investors to the government.  The government doesn't pay for these companies.  This is a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibiting the government from illegal searches and seizures.

To be clear about this, shareholders are not just a bunch of fat cats with wads of cash.  Most retirement funds (like yours) are invested in stocks and mutual funds (which also are invested in stocks).  So, when the government takes ownership of a company without paying for it, they are taking money right out of the retirement funds of millions of working-class people, helping to ensure that their Golden Years of retirement are hungry, cold, and poverty-stricken.

You, as the working class person hoping for a decent retirement someday, just got raped by the socialist government.

When socialists come to power, they immediately raise taxes and use the coercive powers of government to seize the property of anyone who fails to pay "their fair share" as defined by the very luxurious-living leaders of the socialist government.  Your wages and taxes are both set by a government bureaucrat who decides your wages based not on your wants or needs, or how well you do your job, or how demanding or dangerous your job might be. The socialist government bureaucrat sets your wages at what s/he feels you need in order to survive, because in this socialist utopia there is officially no such thing as "getting ahead."  Unless, of course, you become a socialist government bureaucrat and can manage to claw your way up the government hierarchy to a position where some other socialist government bureaucrat above you has decided that your contribution to society, through your amazing government service, is sufficient to warrant a slightly better lifestyle through things like access to the top-bureaucrats-only stores when you can get almost as much decent food as you want, almost whenever you want it.

So, you got raped again either by the tax man, or the some other socialist government bureaucrat who decided how much need to survive.

Of course, you can always live a bit better by becoming a criminal and buying what you can afford through the black market.  If you get caught with this contraband coffee or bread, you will likely lose your job, spend time in jail, perhaps even get sent to a re-education facility where you will be shown how much better it is to embrace socialism than to be beaten periodically and work as a slave laborer.

So, you got raped by the socialist law enforcement.  They may, in fact, physically rape you to help you realize how good you have it when you are playing by the official socialist rules.

On the other hand, the criminals will always be there.  Capitalists in socialist countries are, by definition criminals.  Some will be offering to meet legitimate needs for things like good food or decent appliances.  Others will be offering protection from the police or other thugs.  Either way, unless you throw in your lot with the criminal capitalists, you have no chance of enjoying a life that is any less miserable than all of your neighbors.

Of course, joining the criminal capitalists, you risk getting raped by them, and by the socialists.

The Politics of Envy is a Lie

Socialists build their support using the politics of envy.  They pit the 99% against the 1% and feed the 99% on dreams of living in some measure of the opulence of the 99% by taking it away from the 99% and giving a nice piece of it to them.  The reality plays our very differently.

When the socialist governments confiscate the property and money of the wealthy 1%, they don't distribute it to the masses.  Instead, they use if for themselves.  You don't believe me?  Consider this, when you take away a million dollar house from someone in a newly socialist state, who can buy it to give you the million dollars it is supposedly worth?  The answer is... no one can because no one own owns any personal property anymore so it all belongs to the government.  That means the real property of the rich and famous cannot be sold.  Instead, it must be used.  And who deserves that luxurious house more than the locally appointed government bureaucrat who is laboring so diligently to make sure that no one is holding back any personal property or money, or labor, from the state?

So, not only does the rich owner of the million dollar house get raped by the socialists, so do you.

What about our great jobs!  Well, in a socialist state, labor is optimized according to the wisdom of government bureaucrats.  You get the job where they think you will make the best contribution to the greater good.  And, your boss will be someone who is politically connected within the socialist party, without regard to who is best at the job.  You too will not get promoted until you get all the right political tickets punched.  And, in a truly socialist society your promotion won't get you any more pay, because you don't need it and giving one person more pay than another would antithetical to the egalitarian notions underpinning the entire socialist philosophy.

Once again, you got raped.

It Won't Work That Way for Us

This is another great lie of the socialists everywhere and in the US particularly.  All of them deny or ignore the lessons of the history of abusive socialist governments by treating themselves to the conceit that we are much smarter than all the socialists who have gone before and we will do it right, avoiding the errors and abuses of past efforts and failures.

To believe that we are so much smarter than any who have gone before is simply vanity and conceit. 

Just as the leopard cannot change its spots, humanity is powerless to change its nature.  You can change yourself, but when it comes to changing someone else, the only power you have to either 1) accept them, hoping they will change, or 2) kill them so that they cannot do or say anything to contradict the perfect socialist fantasy.  And that is exactly why socialist governments are renowned for killing millions of their own people before they ever go to war with outsiders.

On this point, about recognizing the flaws of human nature, the men who wrote the US Constitution expressly recognized and made provisions for the fact that human beings are not angels.  They even used that term in the Federalist Papers where they explained and made the case for the US Constitution.  They had already seen how badly people could behave under their Articles of Confederation and had no desire to repeat their former mistakes in setting up a suitable government for this nation.  Nope, I am not giving you that reference, because I want you to spend time sifting through The Federalist Papers to find it yourself and read some advice directly from our founding fathers a little along the way.

Conclusion

Nearly six thousand years of recorded human history, with its repetitive wars, conquests, and countless perfidies both personal and national provides everyone with one clear insight.  Human nature has not materially changed in all of recorded history.  While some people will act selflessly, there are always enough selfish, greedy people out there that we must build our societies, governments, and laws in ways that will protect us from the depredations of those who are willing to get what they want by taking it from others.

Accepting and supporting socialism is not social justice.  Socialism is  rape.

References
The Communist Manifesto
The Federalist Papers
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights
The Articles of Confederation of the United States of America (not to be confused with anything associated with the US Civil War or the Confederate States of America)

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2019 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

 Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

Wealthy Socialists are Liars and Hypocrites

Tom Sheppard

11/22/2019

What do Bernie Sanders, George Soros, Elizabeth Warren, Michael Moore, Susan Sarandon, Danny Devito, and Mark Ruffalo (AKA Bruce Banner) all have in common?

They all profess to embrace socialism, but they don't practice what they preach.  In other words, they are liars and hypocrites.

Unlike Mahatma Ghandi, who literally gave his all to live his beliefs, these wannabe-socialists don't walk the talk.  Not. At. All.

Granted, Elizabeth Warren claims to be "capitalist to the bone."  Notwithstanding her very public claim, the policies she proposes are decidedly socialist.  So, if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, I am going to call it a duck, or in this case she walks and talks like a socialist, so I am calling her a socialist.

Here is the real test they should all take to see if they are really ready and willing to embrace socialism.  Let them give everything they own to charities for the poor (or the government) and make sure they work at least 40 hours per week while only getting an income of $45k per year, pretax.  This means they give up their bank accounts, investments, real estate, royalties, and all other sources of income except their job, which will never pay them any more than $45k per year.

Why $45k?  Because that is about the median pre-tax household income in the US.  In other words 50% of the people in the US live on that, or less.  The other 50% live on that, or more.  The actual median may be more or less than that, and we can agree to adjust the number to that, but the point is that they need to live by what ordinary, working-class people can expect to earn, and no more.

Did I mention this would be pre-tax?  Yes, taxes should be taken out of that gross pay.  Take the same amount of taxes out that anyone in that income bracket would usually pay.  That means their take-home pay is reduced by at least one-third, down to about $30k+ per year to actually live on.

Let them buy or rent a house, pay for their meals, cars, and transportation with this after-tax income.

Furthermore, regardless of what they do, contribute, invent, write, say, etc. limit their income to that $45k pre-tax ceiling.  Anything they get paid above that number goes to the state.  They never get to enjoy any fruits of their labor beyond what the $45k pre-tax income can buy.

"I wrote a best-selling book," Sanders told The New York Times in April. "If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too."

Bernie Sanders 

Bernie, that simply isn't true under socialism.  That is only true under capitalism.  Under socialism, you don't get to keep the fruits of your labors.  All the fruits of your labors go the government and the government bureaucrats give you back what they feel you need to live.  

A socialist government owns you, and all you produce.

Ann Schmidt reports that "after receiving pressure to release his tax returns during his presidential bid, Sanders released 10 years' worth of returns ... According to those returns, the independent Vermont senator's adjusted gross income was $561,293 in 2018 and he paid a 26 percent effective tax rate. In 2017, his adjusted gross income was $1,131,925."

So, Bernie would go from an annual income of anywhere from $500k or $1,132k down to just $45k per year.  On the low end, that means he would give up 90% of his income.  On the high-end, he would be giving up 96% of his current annual income. 

Given that his campaign workers had to go on strike just to get him to pay them $15 per hour, do you really think he would be happy to give up all that income and live on $45k per year?  I don't think so.

How much would they be giving up?

According to my research, what follows are the estimates of net worth of the folks I named above, in ascending order.

• Bernie Sanders (Net worth estimate: $2 million)
• Elizabeth Warren (Net worth estimate: $12 million)
• Michael Moore (Net worth estimate: $50 million)
• Susan Sarandon (Net worth estimate: $50 million)
• Danny DeVito (Net worth estimate: $80 million)
• Mark Ruffalo (Net worth estimate: $20 million)
• George Soros (Net worth estimate: $8,300 million)

While this is a lot of money, net worth doesn't really tell the whole story of what they would give up if the USA embraced socialism, as these folks profess to want.  They would give up much more.

Net worth represents the total value of your assets less the debts associated with them.  So, if you have, as many of these folks do, a house worth $1 million and it has a mortgage of $500k, the net worth of that house is $500k.

Under socialism, you would not only get that $500k mortgage cancelled, you would also lose ownership of and the use of that million dollar home.  

All their private planes, mansions, luxury cars, fine foods, expensive clothes, etc. would be taken from them.  They would all become property of the state and they could only buy what they could afford on their $45k per year (less taxes) salary.

Does anyone really believe that these very wealthy people would be at all happy about giving up ALL that they have earned and ALL that they may yet earn, for any reason, ever?  No, they don't want to give that up.  

They want YOU to give up your opportunity to ever become wealthy like them. 

Capitalism = Opportunity

None of these people inherited their wealth.  They all earned it by their skills and ingenuity in a capitalist economy that lets people vote with their money for the most skillful and ingenious by paying for goods and services.  Under socialism, the economic mechanisms that allowed them to attain their wealth would not be available to them, or anyone else.

So, if they say they want socialism, and socialism would take away all that they have, and they don't want to give up all that they have, what is it that they really want?

Actors like Sarandon, Ruffalo, and DeVito would be paid by the government only what a bureaucrat decided was appropriate.  Likewise movie directors such as Michael Moore.  And, when their performances waned in value for the state, their privileges would be curtailed or revoked and they would soon find themselves living hand-to-mouth, like every other impoverished citizen. Oh, and when they produced a "block-buster movie" they would still only get paid their $45k per year, no matter what the show did at the box office or in video sales all over the world.  As good socialists, they would all be happy to see that their acting and directing efforts produced such a wonderful cash flow for the state.

In a socialist state, wealthy investors like George Soros would not exist, nor would they be allowed to exist.  Their very activities would be unlawful.  Soros himself would likely be killed outright, or arrested and convicted on trumped up charges of treason against the state. Regardless of the path of his fall, all his wealth would be confiscated, with selected holdings made available for use by social party loyalists and those in political power.

What do they really want?

I suggest that what these wealthy "socialists" want is not socialism.  What they want is a form of oligarchy where they are the aristocrats and no one else is allowed to enter their ranks, except through either birth to aristocracy or by power politics in the government.  

As aristocrats, they would retain their wealth and their privileges. Further, they would pass these on to their children in perpetuity.  As aristocrats, their children would have unequaled opportunities to rise to political power, along with all its perks.

In their world, aside from themselves, the government would be the sole vehicle for attaining the perks of wealth and privilege.  No other profession, outside of government, would control the spigots of wealth.  Those spigots would only open for those whom the power-elite and the aristocrats decide is worthy of living an abundant life.

Everyone else will need tighten their belts "for the greater good" and learn to live without.

References

L Maxim Lott, 30 April 2019, Lifestyles of the rich and socialist: American celebs who blast capitalism while making millions, Fox News, https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/lifestyles-of-the-rich-and-socialist-american-celebs-capitalism-millionaires

Ann Schmidt, 21 November 2019, What is Bernie Sanders' net worth?, Fox News, https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/bernie-sanders-net-worth

Anne Sraders, 21 May 2019, What Is Bernie Sanders' Net Worth?, The Street, https://www.thestreet.com/lifestyle/bernie-sanders-net-worth-14678955

Michela Tindera, 20 August 2019, How Elizabeth Warren Built A $12 Million Fortune, Forbes Magazine, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2019/08/20/how-elizabeth-warren-built-a-12-million-fortune/#1eecc607ab57

Taylor Nicole Rogers, 28 June 2019, What George Soros' life is really like: How the former hedge-fund manager built his $8.3 billion fortune, purchased a sprawling network of New York homes, and became the topic of international conspiracy theories, Business Insider, https://www.businessinsider.com/george-soros-net-worth-wife-sons-news-house-career-2019-6

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2019 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

 Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

Moving Toward the Future While Enjoying the Present

Tom Sheppard

7/22/2019

A few years ago my wife and I were in the process of moving out of our home of 23+ years.  The process was very wrenching for several reasons.

The last two of our five children were born while we lived in this house and all five of our children had come to adulthood while we lived here.  So, the home itself had a great amount of our hearts and lives invested in its very walls.   The fact that our move was more or less being forced on us made the whole issue of leaving the house painful in itself.  Also, moving meant getting rid of lots of accumulated "stuff."  Much of that stuff was accumulated based not on monetary value but on sentimental value.  Every parent knows what I am talking about.  The pictures your children brought home which you hung on the fridge, etc.

In the midst of all the chaos of packing boxes, loading a moving truck, and emptying the house we came upon a box with this picture laminated and taped to the top of the box.  At the time it struck me as a sort of message from God, so I took a picture of it and shared it with my wife. 

I admit, amid the pain of the move it was cold comfort.  Still, it did help me to push aside my own emotional upheaval and focus on what might be on the horizon, even if at the time the view ahead was a bit murky.

From this experience I learned to not put so much of myself into "stuff."  The things we accumulate break, tear, wear out, and are eventually discarded.  However, the things we do can remain alive in the hearts and minds of ourselves and those whose lives we touch.

Now, to me it seems like surrounding myself with a lot of stuff seems a lot like living in the past instead of looking toward the future.  If we don't turn and face the future, it is going to smack us hard on the back of the head, because it will arrive whether or not we are facing it.  I have found I would rather be looking ahead so that I can manage things coming at me much better than when I am living in the past, or looking to the past.

Don't get me wrong, I think we all need to examine our history (personal and otherwise) to learn from mistakes (and successes).  And, we need to take those lessons learned and look at what is coming toward us and happening around us and see if we can use them to help us succeed amid all the noise and chaos of the present and the visible future.  The problem comes when we stand there looking only backwards.  Too often we are staring back at failures we experienced, and they are keeping us from succeeding in the future.  Likewise, we may be staring back at our "glory days" believing that the best of us is now in the past.  Being fixated on past successes is almost as deadly as being fixated on past failures.

Learn from the past, don't try to dwell there.  On the other hand, facing the future doesn't mean trying to dwell on it either.  What we see on the horizon may never end up at our feet.  This may be because it turns aside, we turn aside, or we die before that coming wave reaches us.  Instead of dwelling in the past, or fixating on the future we must live in the present and apply all our cunning, knowledge, and energy to making today as wonderful, valuable, and lively as it can be. 

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

 The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

 (c) Copyright 2019 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.