Looters on the Rise
On the fifth of July, USA Today reported on its front page “Jobless Claims Abuses on Rise”. One dollar out of nine is misdirected to those who do not deserve it according to the criteria. United States Department of Labor figures show that approximately nine million, three hundred thousand people receive checks for not working. However, a glaring portion of those do have jobs or are otherwise not adhering the rules related to eligibility.
No one should be surprised by these cases of fraud. The entire system is founded on an immoral precept: demanding money from others without working for it or repaying the sum received. The fact that recipients expect that government will seize money from others on their behalf instead of the jobless forcibly allocating it to themselves does not lessen the receivers’ complicity in this outrage. Reliance on bureaucrats to fleece productive citizens in order to subsidize idle individuals only underscores the sloth of those benefiting from the payments. The continual siphoning of the proceeds of the labor of working Americans dissuades those out of work from seeking jobs or respecting the value of employment.
This income redistribution, along with forcibly transfers of money to give vouchers for housing and grants of food stamps and other nutritional handouts, approximate theft. The mere difference lies in that Uncle Sam is immune to prosecution. Politicians perpetuating addiction to governmental give-aways take from producers and give to looters. These elected officials benefit from the allegiance of the dependent class. These shameless nanny-statists base their actions on the axiom of their fellow socialist, George Bernard Shaw: “A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul.”
Those expecting to be paid for simply existing differ little from animals. Pigeons swarm picnickers or anyone else with food in hand in urban areas; seagulls act in the same manner in coastal locations. The birds congregate around people who actually provide their own sustenance. These creatures aggressively and persistently congregate around, even snatching items from the rightful owners as though it is the birthright of the thieves. Do these beasts sing or otherwise perform to merit the food? No, they simply beg or harass those who fend for themselves into parting with their possessions to placate pests refusing to exert any serious effort into feeding themselves. Anyone who has witnessed professional leeches such as ACORN and other Marxist outfits organizing and leading protests by persistently nonproductive Americans can identify the similarities to their parasitic avian counterparts.
Unemployed members of society who expect to live off the toil of productive persons will find themselves helpless if their governmental benefactors cease the transfusions of earnings. Likewise, if the victims of involuntary donations halt their economic prowess or perish due to the excessive blood-letting, then the babied wards of the government will suffer as well. Those who lack even the drive to seize the provisions themselves, preferring to let strangers in government commit the de facto robbery will possess even fewer means to act proactively for self-sustenance when the goodies without strings attached no longer arrive.
Advocates of open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens frequently claim that those non-citizens perform jobs which Americans will not do. Of course, if legal residents need only fill out some forms to receive checks and other benefits, those with no scruples or self-respect will think nothing of taking money collected from working people to support those who do not. However, those Americans leeching off the industrious will likely drop their objection to menial jobs if those are the only way to avoid starvation and homelessness. Americans would be wise to heed Marcus Tullius Cicero’s advice from over two thousand years ago, “If the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt, people must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Doctor Thomas Sowell eloquently explained in his book, Black Rednecks and White Liberals, the origin of the contempt for honest employment and for those who work for their living. He referred to the freeloading Britons who imported this attitude into the American colonies as “rednecks”. He admitted that this mentality proliferated among black slaves and persists to our current era among various ethnicities and races. He must have had such leeches in mind when he announced in 1992, “If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else’s expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves.”
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT JULY 2011