Ron Arnold  

Change we can believe in. 

Nice slogan. But I'm not buying it.

Is it the government's place to make sure that I get the creature comforts I'm 'entitled' to? It is the government's job to make sure I'm healthy, that I have a roof over my head, and a way to get from point A to point B in the way that I'm accustomed to? Is it my government's job to see to it that I'm taken care of? To see to it that I'm happy? Is it?

Take the recent price jumps in gasoline. Is it the government's job to see to it that gasoline is plentiful and the lowest cost for us as consumers? Or is it our job to see to ourselves? My family is not living the lifestyle we lived just one year ago. We have changed the way we buy, store, and prepare food. We don't travel as muchas we had. And we're working at decreasing the amount of energy we are consuming in our home. Why? Because we've seen the need to make changes in the way we live in order to effectively make ends meet. I don't want to rely on my government to do that for me - for a couple of reasons.

I find it interesting that people are complaining about the record profits being made by the oil companies. Anyone know what their profits are per gallon of gas sold? Eight cents. That's a two percent profit per unit. (A box of cereal has a 17 percent profit margin by the way. Is anyone complaining about "big cereal?") Does anyone want to venture a guess how much the Federal Government takes per gallon of gas sold? 18.4 cents a gallon. (I'm not even getting into the State's tax haul.) So - the oil companies pay for the exploration, drilling, hauling, refining, rehauling and distribution of the oil and the Federal Government does . . . what in that process again? I suppose they have a lot to do with the 'security' and maintaining free routes of transportation for the oil, but somehow I don't think that costs 18.4 cents a gallon. The Federal Goverment tends to over-rate itself in terms of its importance - ya know?

Here's another interesting thing. I have a voluntary retirement account through work. In that retirement account, there are investments made with the money I put into it, the profits of which come back to me. Oil companies are publicly owned and traded and play a large part in the retirement accounts of many Americans. We are (I am) essentially the owners of the oil companies. And those companies are doing their job in making money for me - their stockholder. On the other hand, I am involuntarily mandated to pay a social security tax by my Federal Government. The reason I pay this tax is ostensibly so that I have money for when I retire. The payment is far higher than the voluntary amount I put into my personal retirement account. Yet - from what I understand - by the time I am old enough to 'retire' there won't be any money in the Social Security Funds for me to rely on. It will be gone. The irony in all this is that the Federal Government wants to be able to regulate or limit the profits of the companies that are working for me, yet they are mandating I give them retirement money that I know I'll have little or no chance of getting when it comes time for me to do so.

Isn't that called stealing?

As a consumer I have a choice as to what I buy and whom I give my money to in terms of goods and services. If I think a product is inferior I will not buy it. In fact - if I think that the company behind a product is unethical or the product itself represents something I find offensive, I can boycott that product and even encourage others to do so. Perfectly legal and it happens all the time. I think the Federal Government is nothing but a burgeoning bureaucracy managed by profligate spenders who say they are concerned for my welfare, yet their actions indicate they are more interested in cementing their position of power and influence, thusly perpetuating the bureaucracies they have created.

Am I allowed to boycott the Federal Government by not giving them my money anymore? Would I be allowed to organize a Federal boycott in order to protest their ethics or way of doing business? Um - no. I believe that's called tax evasion and I could go to jail for that. I'd also likely go to jail for organizing a tax revolt if I encouraged others to do so wouldn't I? Would I also be guilty of treason? Insurgency?

Or would I be trying to affect real change not merely by voting for a handpicked candidate, but by taking the power to spend my money away from them?

Some folks would argue that I'm free to leave the country and settle somewhere else, but the fact of the matter is that I love the Constitution and the principles and beliefs that are represented in that document. What I don't care for is the system of administering the Constitution and the massive legal bureaucracy that has arisen through the course of our history. That bureaucracy, administered by the 'people we voted for' (including the folks representing our very own districts), is what is hurting us. They apparently seem more interested in solidifying and maintaining their entrenched status than in 'doing the business of the people.'

Real change will not come this November no matter who is elected as our next President. Real change will come when the American electorate starts to seriously question why things are the way they are and start to act in ways that will change or eliminate the systems that have become detrimental to us. It won't be through just 'voting.' It's going to require attendance at hearings, actively petitioning and assuring follow thorugh, demanding term limits in the legislature, and acting with our pocketbooks.

Till then -'change we can believe in' is just more hopeful thinking and sloganeering.

copyright 2008 Ron Arnold