If you care about the future of the United States - please have a look

[VaBusa]

Hey Willie, I've ordered the book...at times I feel like no one but me walks the fence. I hate both sides of the aisle in our gov't and I hate that gov't exists solely for gov't...

Once I'm done with the book, I'll send it to you. I have no preconceived notions about what is in it; in fact I've only skimmed over the excerpts in this thread because I want to read it in its entirety.

I am so sick of the divisive nature of every conversation in America today; you're either black or white, on this side or that...I am here to say I absolutely am not that person. I see wrong on both sides and I don't like what I see going on for the future of my kids. I do my part and I participate, I vote, I learn all I can, but the sad fact is you're left voting for the lesser of 2 evils anymore and until society as a whole sees this, we will forever continue to further this divide.

I also hate discussing politics because, much like religions, most refuse to ever look beyond themselves to see a bigger view of what others see...

At any rate, my book should arrive today and I'll start reading tonight I hope...looking forward to it

 

[IG.]

VaBusa, you won't be disappointed as there are no politics in the book. If anything it criticizes those on both sides of the isle. I just wanted to point out that you ordered the first version of the book called "Democracy: The Missing Link" and not the newer slightly different version "Killing America Slowly". But don't worry because "Killing America Slowly" is 95% the same - just a couple more chapters, slightly reworked text, and a more provocative title - in order to challenge and engage readers.

 

[IG.]

Thank you for the insight. This shows that most everyone is concerned and is trying to do something about it the best way they can.

you would have like my friend Sputnik. he was a smart human. wrote a book or two. he believed that our government could be taken back 1 vote at a time. they (the bikers) still have a great power in the state of texas because of the format he set up. gimmie jimmy has taken it to a national level with the U.S. Defenders program.

letters, e-mails, phone calls, and caucas rushing is changing the way laws are passed and who is voted in.

if you click around, his books are free. you might dig it.
Democracy: The Missing Link

p.s. as soon as I have a penny to my name, i'll pick up a hard copy of your book.

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 5

What is wrong with Democracy?


I have to admit that I admire people of the United States because they figured it out: democracy in general is better than any other political system. However, living in one of the best countries in the world – observing daily events, watching news on TV, talking to people – most of you feel that not all is well. It is not surprising to observe disagreements between people in general, disagreements between cultures, disagreements between generations, and disagreements between the rich and the poor – after all, you are all humans. But what causes most dissatisfaction and frustration in all people – regardless of their cultural background, financial status, or age group – is dissatisfaction with governments – be it the federal, state, or a local government. The most prevalent feelings are those of frustration and hopelessness. You know by now who is to blame for this, but I will be humble and won't take all the credit.

“Houston, we have a problem!†You the people of this country want to send a distress signal to Mission Control or to the base. But there is no base, there is no Mission Control – it's just you all alone, and me, the Devil. Some people believe that electing the right politician is the solution. As your own history proved time and again, this accomplishes little in the long run.

So, what about your governments? More or less they stink – they do a mediocre job at best, and they do outright harm at worst. You like to criticize them – which is unproductive and useless, and only contributes to your frustration. But what you cannot do is to get rid of them. You need all those federal, state and local governments, and cannot live without them because someone has to do what the government is supposed to do. No matter what political party, any government knows they cannot be fired.

Of course, elected officials can be re-elected. First of all, they know how to play the game, how to convince you they did everything they could under the circumstances, and how they will do everything they can in the future, and solve all your problems.

Second of all, even if an elected official loses, another one wins – the one which is not better or marginally better. But it is you the people who lose no matter what.

And third of all, what about the entire governmental bureaucracy who you pay to operate, and operate efficiently? This monstrous machine – again be it the federal, state, or your local government – stays the same no matter how you vote. You know it, they know it – and so nothing really changes, except for the fact that those bureaucracies are getting bigger and become more powerful, corrupt, and inefficient.

Aren’t you all clever enough to figure out this dilemma? There are so many smart, talented and hard working people in your country! Their combined qualities and efforts propel the development of your society in many areas. Making sure the governments work for you and you only doesn't seem like such an impossible task. Is there a way to make things better without drastic changes to your existing political system? Maybe there is.

Let me help you figure out what is the root cause of that splinter in your mind which bothers you all the time, which you try not to pay attention to, which occasionally boils your frustration into a splash of angry outcome – something that each of you wishes had a solution which would make your society better, and ultimately benefit all of you.

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 6

You deserve your governments


I've heard this more than once: “People deserve their governmentsâ€. Simply put, whatever government you’ve got, you deserve it – be it a bad government or a good one. I partially disagree with such statement because it is not true for totalitarian, autocratic, and dictatorship regimes. It would be unfair to tell those people they deserve their governments because in those countries positive changes are impossible without struggle, sacrifice, blood, and pain. Again, not trying to take credit for these achievements of mine – just building an argument.

However, I have to be brutally honest with you – people who live in democratic countries truly deserve their governments! Because these people have the power to change things for the better. If they don’t, they have no one to blame but themselves.

I understand that making societal changes is not an easy process even in a democratic society. You all have opinions, you all have differences, you continuously argue with each other about political issues – be it at a party, in a company’s lunch room, or at the family dinner table. How do you agree on something that needs to be changed, something that you all believe will produce positive outcome, something not so drastic that you would need to replace the existing system, something that can actually be implemented in a practical and painless way, and what is most important – something that would benefit all of you, something that would give you actual control over your governments – be it the federal, state, or a local government? Most everyone feels something is amiss. Your governments are getting more and more out of control. There are just so many things the governments do which don't make any sense! Governmental bureaucracies keep growing no matter what politician is elected, they require more money to operate while at the same time becoming more disconnected from the people and becoming self serving institutions. It stopped making sense a long time ago. Wouldn't you agree?

Many of you would argue that collectively you already control your governments through the democratic process. Well, you do elect most important federal, state, and local public officials. In that respect, you certainly have a degree of control by voting for those elected officials who you feel would better serve your interests. And that is the enormous amount of control a democratic society puts in the hands of the people. But that’s where your control ends! Being able to control the government – any government – once a year, once every two years, or once every four years is certainly so much better than not having any control at all. But what if you feel that neither candidate is good enough? The only choice is to vote for the candidate who you dislike less. What if roughly half of the people wants one candidate while another half wants another candidate? This means that no matter who is elected, half of the people will be dissatisfied. Is that what people deserve? Is that what you personally deserve?

What about the time between elections? You are at the mercy of the government who is supposedly working for you. What if you are not satisfied? What can you do in practical terms to influence the government's decisions? Do you know what the governments do on a daily basis? Recall those moments when you personally were dissatisfied with the federal, state, or your local government, and what did you do about it if anything at all, and what was the result? Did you feel that you were in charge, or did you feel that you were begging for something? Did you experience frustration or satisfaction?

You probably start suspecting that I am getting at something, and you are right. I am trying to illustrate that you do not have real control over your governments – be it the federal, state, or your local government. You can argue that you elect Senators from their respective states. You have Representatives from their respective districts – all those form Congress which is supposedly protecting interests of the people within the federal government. I would argue however that all these people became a part of the governmental system. It would be unfair to say they do nothing, however in the long run they seem to be incapable to prevent governmental decay and corruption. You know who to thank , but again, I am not taking any credit... Similar argument goes for state and local governments. Dissatisfaction with governments grows over time. Everyone can come up with examples of something done by the governments which didn't make sense or was plain wrong.

Let me give you a hint. All of this is happening because personally or collectively you do not have real control over your governments. You believe you do, you may be saying it to others and yourself, but in reality you don't.

So, let me reveal another evil principle I seeded in human minds a long time ago.

Absence of clarity is the driving force of misconception, which is amplified by the ability of humans to believe in things which are repeated by others many times.

For example, you generally believe that you are in great control of your governments because you elect public officials. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[IG.]

Killing America Slowly, Chapter 7

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 7

What does it mean to be in full control?


Let's get serious for a minute. How do you like my evil writings so far? As you can see, I am not all that bad. Being honest and sincere are some of my qualities. So, let me continue on a serious note.

I will get right to the point. It would be a waste of time to talk about your ability to control governments without clear understanding what is control. What does it mean when one entity is in full control of another entity? Is it possible to identify key criteria with clarity and without any ambiguity? Here it is.

One entity is in full control of another entity when all of the following conditions are true.

a) At any time, the controlling entity is able to communicate a corrective message to the entity being controlled.

b) The controlling entity can do so with ease.

c) At any time, the controlling entity is able to enforce a corrective action upon the entity being controlled.

Not satisfying any one of these conditions greatly diminishes the ability to control. I challenge anyone to come up with a more broad, accurate, clear, simple, and logical definition of full control. Let's have a look at a few common life human situations, and see how the definition of full control applies. We will mark relevant conditions in parenthesis.

Consider a relationship between a parent and a child. A parent is able to communicate with a child verbally (a). Verbal communication is easy (b). A parent is able to enforce a corrective action by means of its authority and physical force (c). For example, if a child is touching a painting on the wall, a parent who is reading a book on the other side of the room may say: “Please don't touch the paintingâ€￾, and a child would instantly stop. However, if a child is listening to music through headphones, there is no easy way to communicate (b). A parent may try shouting. A parent may need to put the book down, walk all the way to the other side of the room, touch a child to get the attention, wait until a child removes the headphones or reduces the volume, and only then say: “Please don't touch the paintingâ€￾. It becomes significantly more difficult to control a child in such circumstances (b). A parent may decide not to get involved, and let a child touch the painting, thus avoiding the inconvenience associated with controlling a child.

In another example, if a grandparent is too soft with a grandchild who regularly misbehaves, such grandparent may not be able to control a grandchild even when standing next to him. A grandchild simply would not listen. This is because a grandparent is not able to enforce a corrective action (c).

Let’s say you work for a company. Your supervisor monitors what you are doing, and at any time is able to either confirm that what you are doing is OK, or express dissatisfaction with what you are doing (a). Your supervisor can do so verbally, via a phone call, or maybe via an email (b). You would have to adjust your actions. If you fail to do so, this may result in various degrees of punishment, or even a layoff (c). As a result, your supervisor has full control over what you do at work.

Let’s consider a small business whose owner has to satisfy the needs of its customers. If such business does something wrong, a customer has the freedom to speak up either verbally or by making a phone call (a, b). If a business owner fails to address a customer's concern, he may lose a customer and their payment (c). By these means, customers control a small business.

Let’s consider a company's CEO who seemingly can do whatever he wants to. If products or services the company provides fail to address the needs of its customers the company would start losing business. This will be noticed by the board of directors or by investors, who in turn will insist on certain corrective actions (a, b). If the CEO fails to address the issues, they may fire the CEO (c) and hire another CEO. The CEO is controlled by the board of directors and by investors, and indirectly is controlled by the customers.

Consider a mutually respectful relationship between two friends. They easily communicate with each other (a, b). However, they do not force a corrective action on each other (c). Therefore, neither friend has full control over the other.

Similar logic applies to any mutually respectful relationship between two people. For example, a relationship between a husband and a wife, or a relationship between a boyfriend and a girlfriend.

If a mutually respectful relationship between two people deteriorates to a degree where one person starts enforcing his/her will over the other side (c), the relationship changes in that one person now has full control over another person. Although not being a healthy relationship, this provides an illustration of how the ability to control may change over time.

Can you offer your own examples where one entity has full control over another entity? Can you come up with examples where one entity does not have full control over the other one? Wouldn't you agree that the definition of full control above is valid in every case?

The significance of the definition of full control is that it allows to analyze real life situations in order to objectively determine whether one entity is in full control of another entity.

 

[IG.]

Killing America Slowly, Chapter 8

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 8

Degrees of control


As was mentioned in the definition of full control, not being able to satisfy any one of the three conditions leads to loss of full control. However, the ability for partial control may still remain. You may have heard expressions referring to some degree of control. For example, “It's hard to control that childâ€, or “I wish I had more control over the governmentâ€, or “The teacher in class was having a hard time controlling the studentsâ€. The degrees of control mentioned in these examples are vague. Without quantifying degrees of control, any discussion about control is not productive because it is not clear to what degree various factors affect the ability of one entity to control another entity.

Is there a way to clearly identify and calculate the degree of control? Yes, it is. And it is as simple as bread and butter.

Degree of control is a percentage of successful control attempts out of total number of the desired control attempts.

If a parent wanted (desired) to exercise control over a child 10 times, actually attempted to exercise control 8 times, and was successful 6 times – the parent achieved 60% control over a child (6 / 10 * 100%). It does not matter that the parent attempted to exercise control 8 times – the likely cause of not exercising control 10 times was that at least one of the conditions from the definition of full control was not satisfied.

If a supervisor is not satisfied with the performance of an employee, and desired to express dissatisfaction 5 times, actually expressed his dissatisfaction 4 times, and was successful every time he did so – he achieved 80% control over an employee ( 4 / 5 * 100%).

If over a period of a month, a teacher wanted (desired) to exercise control over students in the classroom 120 times, actually attempted to exercise control 10 times, and was successful only 6 times – the teacher achieved only 5% control over the students (6 / 120 * 100%).

Consider examples from your personal experience, and calculate the degrees of control for the controlling party. You may be surprised at the results.

 

[IG.]

Killing America Slowly, Chapter 9

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 9

Between you and the government, who is in control?


Consider your relationship with a government entity – be it the federal, state, or your local government. Let's try to figure out if you are in full control. We will analyze every condition from the definition of full control, and will mark in parenthesis relevant conditions. Are you able to communicate a message of dissatisfaction to your government (a)? You could call, but do you know who to call, and will they listen (a)? How would you find out the right number? How much time would you have to spend looking for the right person in the government to contact (b)? You can write a letter, but this is pretty time consuming (b). Do you know where to write a letter (a)(b)? Are you able to take a corrective action (c)? Most of the time, one or more conditions from the definition of full control are not true. There are no clear communication channels (a). Yes, you can figure it out with time and effort which is often a challenge (b). More often than not, your communications will disappear as in black hole. Most of the time, you are not able to take any corrective action, individually or collectively (c).

Conclusion: you are not in full control of the governments.

At best, you only have partial control over your governments. How much control do people really have over their governments? Let's consider the federal government over a period of 4 years. How many times on average a voter had a desire to exercise control over the United States government? Every day, a few times a week, once a week? Let's make a reasonable assumption of once a week. Over a period of 4 years, that would total 208 desired actions (52 weeks * 4 years). Let's round this number to 200 for the ease of calculations. That's how many times on average a voter wanted to exercise control over the federal government. How many times on average a person attempts to send a message of dissatisfaction to the federal government – be it the President, a Congress person, or any other contact within the federal government? Very few people attempt that – probably no more than 1%. This means that on average people attempted to communicate their dissatisfaction with the federal government only 2 times (1% out of 200) over a period of 4 years. Can you guess whether these 2 attempts resulted in the desired outcome? Probably not. But for the sake of argument, we assume a quite optimistic outcome, and say that 10% of those attempts succeeded - which would make it 0.2 successful attempts on average (10% of 2). During the past few presidential elections the votes were split almost evenly. This means that half of the people achieved control, but the other half didn't. So, at best this could be counted as 0.5 successful control attempts on average. Same could be said regarding votes for a Senator, and a Representative – giving 0.5 successful results to each of them. Total number of successful control attempts would be 0.2 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.7. Let's round this number to 2 for the ease of calculations.

So, for a total number of 200 instances when a voter wanted to exercise control – there are only 2 instances on average which produced the desired outcome. The degree of control was 2 / 200 * 100% = 1%. That's how little actual control we have over the United States government! You may argue that the assumptions above are inaccurate. Then, try to make assumptions based on your own experience, and calculate the degree of control. You may get a slightly higher number. Nevertheless, this is a far cry from having close to a 100% control.

Conclusion: people have very little actual control over their governments.

So, is it good or bad to have 1% control over a government? Yes and No. It all depends on what it is compared to. Having a small degree of control over a government is so much better than not having any control at all. That's what differentiates a democracy from a totalitarian or autocratic regime. However, is this the degree of control people can be satisfied with? The answer is probably No.

Let’s see if by any chance the government has any control over people. Again, we will mark in parenthesis relevant conditions from the definition of full control. Federal, state, and local governments have your address and your phone number on their records, and are able to send you a letter or call you at any time (a). It is really easy for the government – just print a letter and drop it into a mailbox, or pick up a phone and make a phone call (b). If you do not comply with the government's request, you will be punished in terms of fines, or even jail (c). At any time, the government has the means to force you to comply by utilizing the entire law enforcement apparatus at the government's disposal (c).

Conclusion: the government has full control over you.

This is a sad reality of today's democracy, despite the fact that so many people would not admit, and despite the fact the most everyone feels that something is wrong in their relationship with the governments.

It appears that governments rarely enforce their control. This is because your governments are not evil as I am, and do not exercise their control for a specific individual too often. But make no mistake – once the government wants to enforce its control on an individual, there is little an average person can do in order to avoid it. People who had such firsthand experiences, or know someone who had such an experience would attest to that. Many of them compare government actions with evil forces, and now you know that this is not just a matter of expression.

Have you ever been audited by the IRS or know someone who has been audited? How does it feel to be at the mercy of bureaucrats who have all the power over you? Are you able to audit any government official and make them accountable? Of course, not.

Have you ever thought that your Social Security Number (SSN) has little to do with your social security, but for all practical consideration is really your Individual Tracking Number, which makes it so convenient for the government to track many of your activities? Companies follow the suit, and use your so called social security number to track many of your activities as well. Otherwise, why would you be asked for your social security number when applying for a job, opening a bank account, buying a new car, applying for a mortgage, applying for a driver license, visiting a doctor, applying for medical insurance, and so on, and so forth.

Whether a newborn or a new resident of the United States, assignment of social security number is the first thing that happens. Is it because the federal government is concerned about the social security of a person? Or, is it to be able to track such person's activities? It does not matter what the original intent of social security numbers was. What really matters – what it means today.

Term Social Security Number should be replaced with a more accurate term – Individual Tracking Number. Of course, federal government will never consider such change because this would reveal the real purpose of social security numbers as they are utilized today.

If you are not convinced regarding the real purpose of social security numbers try asking government officials the same questions, and then see whether their answers make sense to you.

How is it possible that seemingly well intended social security initiative turned into such evil reality – to track every person's important activities? Why no one noticed?

 

[IG.]

Killing America Slowly, Chapter 10

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 10

Why governments exhibit such bad behavior?


In short, because governments consist of humans. When there is little control and oversight, humans exhibit predictable behavior leading to abuse and corruption. Such is human nature which has been affected by my evil influence, and it is very naive to ignore it. There are built-in oversight mechanisms in governments. However, they are ineffective because over time they became a part of the same governmental system – participating people have adopted to it, and not in a good way. They claim to perform oversight, but because they are also humans which were affected by my evil influence, they became so corrupt and ineffective that very little is done to make a positive impact.

It is an overreaction to perceive entire governments as evil. They are not. And actually there are a number of people in your governments who truly want to do their job. However, it does not take too many people, especially those at the top, to create a culture of power, corruption, and ignorance – believe me, I know how to make it happen. Others have no choice, but to comply with the established norm. Otherwise, they stand to lose their jobs and become outcasts.

Sometimes, such good and decent people become fed up with what they observe within the government, and become whistleblowers. This is a rare occurrence because I don't allow such good people to raise their voice.

The decay of democratic governments does not occur overnight because people do have a small degree of control. Such process is very gradual and is hard to notice, and that is why it meets so little resistance. As a result, evil wins – slowly and gradually.

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 11

Politicians have no shame


You really have to appreciate my forthright approach, honesty, and attention to detail. I am pretty sure that by the end of this book, you won't think of me, the Devil, as a hundred percent evil creation. In yet another illustration, I want to share with you my small achievements.

Absence of full control over elected public officials creates a political climate promoting abuse of power, irresponsibility, corruption, and bribery. This in turn fosters politicians and political appointees who are arrogant, incompetent, think they are better than others and can get away with most anything. I am so proud of them. Consider a small sample of such cases below.

IRS admitted to inappropriate investigation of conservative political groups associated with the Tea Party. President Obama labeled the IRS’s actions "inexcusable." He demanded and accepted the resignation of Steven T. Miller who was Acting Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Joseph Grant who was commissioner of the IRS Tax-exempt and Government entities division, and Lois Lerner who was head of the IRS Office of Exempt Organizations and who stated she had not done anything wrong and then took the Fifth before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-IL) pled guilty to one felony count of fraud for using $750,000 of campaign money to buy personal items such as stuffed animals, elk heads and fur capes. His wife, Sandi Jackson, who is a Chicago City Alderman, pled guilty to filing false income tax statements at the same time.

Tom DeLay (R-TX). On November 24, 2010, a Texas jury convicted DeLay of money laundering connected to the Jack Abramoff scandal. On January 10, 2011, he was sentenced to three years in prison in Texas.

G. Thomas Porteous, Federal Judge for Eastern Louisiana, was unanimously impeached by the US House of Representatives on charges of bribery and perjury in March 2010. He was convicted by the US Senate and removed from office.

Samuel B. Kent Federal District Judge of Galveston, Texas, was sentenced to 33 months in prison for lying about sexually harassing two female employees.

Kyle Foggo Executive director of the CIA was convicted of honest services fraud in the awarding of a government contract and sentenced to 37 months in federal prison at Pine Knot, Kentucky. On September 29, 2008, Foggo pleaded guilty to one count of the indictment, admitting that while he was the CIA executive director, he acted to steer a CIA contract to the firm of his lifelong friend, Brent R. Wilkes.

Ted Stevens, Senator (R-AK), was convicted of seven counts of bribery and tax evasion October 27, 2008. He then lost re-election.

Charles Rangel (D-NY) failed to report $75,000 income from the rental of his villa in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic and was forced to pay $11,000 in back taxes.

Bill Clinton, President (D), Impeached by the House of Representatives for perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly lying under oath about sexual relations with intern Monica Lewinsky. Clinton was acquitted by the Senate and remained in office for the rest of his term. Clinton subsequently was cited for contempt of court and agreed to a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license (1998). On October 1, 2001, Bill Clinton was barred from practicing law before the Supreme Court of the United States (2001).

Former NY Governor Spitzer (D) reportedly had at least seven liaisons with prostitutes from the escort agency over six months, and paid more than $15,000 for their services. Federal agents had him under surveillance twice in 2008. According to published reports, investigators believe Spitzer paid up to $80,000 for prostitutes over a period of several years – first while he was attorney general, and later as governor.

American politician Anthony Weiner, former U.S. Congressman (D) from New York City, has been involved in two sexual scandals related to sending explicit sexual material by cell phone. The first led to his resignation as a congressman in 2011. The second, during his attempt to return to politics as candidate for mayor of New York City, involved three women Weiner admitted having sexted after further explicit pictures were published in July 2013.

Eight and a half months after being elected chief executive of California’s second-largest city, 17 women have accused Mayor Bob Filner (D) of sexual harassment. Some allegations against him are recent; others date back 25 years. Filner also faced investigations for misuse of city-issued credit cards and shaking down developers.

Wikipedia is the source of the most of the examples above. This is a very small sample, and there are many more examples of wrongdoings by politicians.

When you consider all known cases, do you think that this is it, or what became public is only the tip of the iceberg?

Still have doubts that this couldn't have happened all by itself, and without help from my evil forces?

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 12

Government actions which make no sense


The decision making process of bureaucracies could be compared to an elaborate puzzle game with rules that don't make any sense (see chapter “Evil driving principles of government's behaviorâ€), and played by many players. That is why the outcome of government's decisions often makes no sense as well. Here are a few examples of such actions which I hope will further convince you in the presence of my evil forces at play. Feel free to add to this list based on your personal experience.

Federal Govt: Salaries. Average personal income in 2012 was $42,693. Average personal income in Washington, D.C. Was $74,710. Do you personally have any say regarding what salaries should be paid to federal employees?

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Taxes. Do you think that taxes are too high? Do you have any control over how your taxes are being spent? Do you feel that big part of tax code is designed to squeeze more money out of you?

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Government spending. Do you have any idea where all the money goes? Have you ever seen a spreadsheet with all government spending drilled down to the smallest level of detail? Government officials would tell you that such detailed information does not exist, and you cannot view it. If the government doesn’t have that level of detail, they don’t know where the money is going. What is more important, if you don’t know where the money goes, you can’t make an informed decision whether these expenses make any sense.

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Outdated laws. It seems that new laws and regulations are created almost every day, growing the bureaucracy and increasing its complexity. What about old and outdated laws? Is anyone reviewing old laws and removing those which are outdated or no longer make sense?

Federal Govt: Use of Social Security Funds. The funds are meant to provide social security benefits, and are not supposed to be used for anything else. Federal government had no problem using the money for other purposes. It's not their money, so why not?

Federal Govt: Social Security Fund. By design of the government, working people are contributing to this fund, while retired workers receive compensation. Such mechanism is fundamentally flawed because it requires to have significantly more working people than retirees. Once the ratio changes, there is not enough working people to contribute, the fund is quickly depleted, and becomes insolvent. Why Social Security Fund was never transformed to work on the principles similar to 401(k) plans? This would promote personal responsibility, prevent the government from using these funds, and let every person know exactly how much money they can count on during their retirement, and regardless of what is going on with the government.

State and Federal Govt: Unemployment Benefits. The payments are too small, and the payment period may be too short for some people – especially for people who worked for many years prior to losing their job. Why not implement this benefit as real insurance? The longer a person is employed, the more payout is given in case of a job loss. If someone wants to purchase more compensation, especially at the start of their working career, this could be done as well.

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Never enough money. It seems every government is always short on funds, especially in poor economy. Why not save money when times are good, and use the surplus during bad times? Oh, that would require the government to exercise fiscal discipline and responsibility – a foreign concept to them. Raising taxes is an easier alternative.

Local Govt: Repaved the library parking lot which was in perfectly good condition while the access road to the local school has been all beat up for years.

Local Govt: Zoning of elementary, middle, and high schools. Parents are unable to chose better schools for their children, and are forced to attend a school in their zone of residence which is often not the best, or even could be further away then a better school in a different zone. Such system allows bad schools to exist. Public schools are paid for by your tax dollars. Public school system is so inefficient that the actual price of education is comparable or costs more than for private schools. Why not privatize public education in many areas, issue to every child a voucher of let's say $10,000 per year, and let the parents decide what school a child will attend? Better schools will get the funds associated with vouchers while poorly performing schools will not. As a result, schools will get an incentive to get better, or their administration and teachers will be replaced.

Federal and State Govt: Why retirement age goes up? If people live longer, wouldn't it make sense to not increase the retirement age so that older people could enjoy their life longer after working hard for so many years? No, the government wants to pay less in social security and other benefits while at the same time collecting more income taxes from older workers.

State and Local Govt: Why fines for traffic and parking violations go to the government? The intent of fines is to punish offenders, and not to generate revenue for the government, right? The collected fines should be distributed as a reward to other drivers who obey traffic and parking rules. Makes sense, right? Wrong! It is an important revenue generator for state and local governments.

State and Local Govt. Doing time instead of fine for traffic and parking violations. Why not offer an offender an alternative to perform a few hours of community service or simply come to a police station and sit there for a few hours as a means of punishment? Because traffic and parking fines is an important revenue generator for state and local governments.

Local Govt: Red light cameras. It has been proven by many studies that red light cameras increase the number of accidents, and not decrease them. Few honest municipalities removed them. However, most of them stay in place, and new red light cameras are being installed every day – all in the name of safety, and with little mentioning what a great source of revenue they are, and how expensive it is to maintain them – all at the taxpayer's expense. Installation of a single red light camera costs approximately $60,000.

Local Govt: No solution for extra parking space. Governments do not offer any solution when there is a shortage of parking space. They simply disallow illegal parking while generating additional revenue from parking tickets. How about allowing drivers to double park for a few minutes while leaving a note with the driver's cellphone number? How about allowing to park at bus stops while leaving enough room between cars so that other people are able to board a bus? How about making a precise schedule of street cleaning in big cities so that drivers can get out of the way for a few minutes, and then park their cars back in the same spot? That's not going to work for the government – too much work to come up with the schedule, and it doesn't bring any additional revenue.

Local Govt: Top paid school superintendents in Nassau County, NY made $350,000 - $550,000 during 2013/2014 school year. There are probably many similar instances in other counties. Can you justify such salaries? Do you have any say regarding what those salaries should be?

Local Govt: No air conditioners in classrooms. School classes often don’t have air conditioners. As a result, children have to suffer from heat during early fall and late spring periods. Purchased in volume, a 12,000 BTU air conditioner could cost no more than $200. For 100 classrooms, that would cost $20,000 – a miniscule amount compared to overall school district budgets of tens of millions of dollars, and compared to the salaries of superintendents of the same districts.

State and Local Govt: Enforcement of speed limits - all in the name of safety, right? Radars and lasers (expensive military technology) are used to enforce arbitrary set fixed speed limits. However, absolutely nothing is being done to use any kind of technology to adjust those speed limits according to traffic flow, weather conditions, time of day, etc. Can you guess why? The latter does not bring any revenue while the former does.

Local Govt: Parking tickets. Municipalities are unable to create extra parking space. However, they will spend your tax dollars to hire more traffic officers, pay their salaries and benefits while diligently writing parking tickets and effectively collecting yet another tax from the same people. At the same time, government vehicles are being illegally parked everywhere and are not getting any tickets. Ticket courts are a joke – they pay salaries and provide benefits out of your taxes to the so called judges who most of the time just shove it in your face and find you guilty of parking illegally. Do you feel the entire system is setup unfairly, and there is nothing you can do?

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Dishonesty, corruption, and crime. You've heard about quite a few scandals involving politicians. Do you think that is it, or what became public is only the tip of the iceberg?

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Nearsightedness of politicians. Every politician is elected for a term. Coupled with little real control from the people, a politician inevitably pursues short term goals. As a result, the government's behavior is zigzagging instead of being consistent through the years.

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Ignorance. When a politician is confronted to explain his action or what he said, oftentimes such politician chooses to simply ignore the requests. There is little people can do about it.

Local, State, and Federal Govt: Big brother. Government law enforcement often sets up roadblocks to check that your vehicle's paperwork is in order. Violators or those who don't comply will be fined, their cars can be impounded, and some may even be taken to jail. Are you able to verify anything the government is doing wrong and punish a government official in the same way? I didn't think so.

State and Federal Govt: Consumer protection. Batteries – heavy duty, super heavy duty, copper top, etc. So much confusion to an average consumer. Rechargeable batteries clearly indicate their capacities – for example 2000 mAh. Why not regular batteries? The more the capacity, the better the battery. It's that simple. A requirement for all batteries to clearly show their capacity would make perfect sense.

State and Federal Govt: Salaries and benefits of politicians. Do you know what they are? Do they make sense to you? Do you have any say as to what they should be? Does the government set their own salaries and benefits? You bet.

Local Govt: Prolonged road repairs. Some construction and road repair projects go on for many months and even years, reducing the number of available lanes, and slowing down traffic every day. There seems to be just a handful of workers at those sites. One can't help but wonder who in their right mind did the planning and why?

Can you offer your own examples of government actions which make no sense to you? Are you getting the feeling that there has to be evil conspiracy involved in all of this?

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 13

What are they doing on a daily basis?


Would you like to know what politicians are doing on a daily basis? They work for you, right? You elected them, you honored them with such an important public work, and you are paying their salaries. On top of that, they wanted to serve the public – no one forced them.

Don’t you have the right to know what is it they do? How about spending a few minutes at the end of each day, summarizing what was accomplished, and posting it somewhere on the website? If being too busy or on a trip, such summary could be written later and cover a period of a few missed days.

This could be as simple as this: “Had a meeting with such and such. Discussed such and such issue. It was productive/not productive discussion. We agreed on such and such points. Will need to run it by my team. Will need to figure out whether spending public money on this project makes sense.â€￾ Something along these lines. And if an elected official doesn’t have time to do this, then such an elected official is not suitable for public service. Elected officials have plenty of helpers on their staff. So, you should accept no excuses.

Have you ever thought why such simple idea is never voiced, nor implemented by any politician? I know the answer, but can you guess why? The reality is that, despite calling themselves public servants, no politician wants to be controlled by people. Such detailed reporting would show that some politicians waste most of their time. Not something they want to reveal.

However, look at yourself. When you work for someone, your boss can and does check on your work any time, and demands from you to adjust if she is not happy with your performance.

Why politicians should be any different? What is it your President does on a daily basis, or your Senator, or your Representative? What about the Governor of your state, or a member of the state legislature? How about the Mayor of your city, or other elected members of your local government?

It is your inherent right to verify and question the work of all those elected officials. Because if you don’t, they will surely take advantage of it. If they don't like it, they are free to leave.

 

[VaBusa]

I've got my book, only read the first chapter, then life took a "way too busy" turn...

So far, so good, but I need to dig in...

 

[IG.]

Thanks for the update, VaBusa! You will still be far ahead of the forum version, despite the fact that I will be putting out 2 chapters a day as some of them are pretty short. And again, thank you for your support of the great cause!

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 14

Who can you trust to form an opinion?


Call me evil, call me names, but yet again I will give you a sincere and honest advice. In today's world of informational overload, who can you trust to provide an objective and unbiased opinion? Frankly, no one! You have to strive to form your own opinion on any subject.

If you don't, there will always be someone who will try to form an opinion for you, and take advantage of it.

It happens every day – a TV commercial which promises miracles, a sales person pitching a product, or a government official making promises and justifying his actions.

Should you trust and believe what government officials tell you? Not blindly. If it makes sense to you personally, then Yes. If it doesn't make sense to you personally, then No.

Should you believe me, your evil friend? Only if it makes sense to you. Otherwise, No. This is your life, and therefore it is your decision and your responsibility to figure things out on your own.

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 15

How governments affect public opinion?


In my continuous quest to gain your trust, I will reveal to you another fine detail of my evil plan.

It is a natural human desire for government officials to preserve their institution. Therefore, it is very important for them to convince other people that government is doing a good job, and is protecting people's interests. If convinced, people would vote for and support such government. To achieve this, government officials deploy various degrees of demagoguery, unverifiable statements, and outright lies. Have you ever wondered how vague are speeches of government officials, and how little sense they make sometimes?

For example, stating that governments can create jobs is an outright lie although by now there are many people who truly believe this. If government really could, your people wouldn't have any recessions and excessive unemployment in the first place! There are a couple of good reasons why it is so important for the government to lie. If people believe the government has the power to create jobs, then people become dependent on the government – which strengthens its power. People will tend to vote for such government – effectively preserving its power. The reality is that government is not making anything, but can only spend the money it collected. The best the government can do is to reverse negative conditions the same government created in the first place!

In order to win votes of poor people, government overtaxes rich people, and redistributes income to poor people. So poor people start believing that the government is on their side and vote for such government – effectively promoting the process of governmental decay. What poor people don't realize is that there are not enough riches in the world to make them prosperous. And when the inevitable crisis occurs, the same poor people will suffer the most. Buying votes of poor people creates and promotes the highest degree of governmental corruption.

Vague, repetitive, and absurd statements of government officials are meant to convince people in something that isn't true. Always question what politicians say, and try to make sense out of it. And if it doesn't make sense to you – then it doesn't make sense at all.

Ideological split between different people is dividing your country and makes it weaker in all aspects. Bigger gap between Republicans and Democrats already caused a stalemate and federal government shutdowns in the past. This is because Democrats want to “take care†of people and are unable to exercise fiscal discipline, while Republicans promote self reliance and smaller governments, although many perceive them as helping the rich. Such split between the two main parties as well as between their followers will only deepen this conflict – with no solution in site, making people fight with one another instead of focusing on something productive.

The reality is that anyone in the United States can become rich. It is as simple as providing products and services which others need. Important ingredients include education, years of hard work, initiative, research, trial-and-error, persistence, risking your own money, believing in yourself, and many other things. There is no guarantee for success. However, you are guaranteed to be poor if you never try. You are guaranteed to be poor if you don't pursue education, not willing to work hard, and not willing to spend your personal time in pursuit of success.

 

[IG.]

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 16

Anti-government movement and terrorism

I often lead people onto the wrong path. Thanks to my evil influence they are convinced in their rightfulness.

Dissatisfaction with governmental control and intrusion into people's private lives increase over time – causing frustration in many people. This results in the growth of anti-government movement whose objective is to highlight government's wrongdoings and convince other people to vote for a change. This is a naive approach because it does not address the root cause of such governmental behavior.

Some people and groups increasingly resort to acts of terror and sabotage. On one hand, it satisfies their frustration. On the other hand, they believe this may change the government for the better. This is also a naive, but desperate and violent approach which will only cause stricter governmental controls combined with aggressive deployment of law enforcement.

If somehow you could arrive at the situation where people truly control their governments, there would be no need for massive anti-government movement and associated acts of terror – they would simply disappear.

 

[IG.]

Killing America Slowly, Chapter 17

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 17

Hoping for a good king


Believe it or not, but despite being evil, I also have emotions. At times, I really sympathize with humans and how they suffer from their own ignorance and nearsightedness.

Centuries ago, people were hoping that a new king would be kind and fair, which in turn would make lives of people easier and happier. In the same way, people of today are hoping that a newly elected politician will address the people's needs and will make their lives easier and happier. You argue with each other who to elect until you are blue in the face. But as soon as the election is over, you go back to your routine – having no clue what the newly elected politician is doing, and being unable to influence his or her actions.

As a result, your society zigzags with every new elected politician instead of continuing on a steady course which makes sense.

Don't you think that in the long run it should matter less which politicians are elected, but should matter more what such politicians are doing?

 

[IG.]

Killing America Slowly, Chapter 18

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 18

The rich and the poor – the great divide

Don't blame evil for dividing people, and for making them fighting each other. It is so easy to accomplish, and therefore this is your greatest weakness. You people are incapable to be united by the same purpose, and live by the same principles.

If one listens to discussions in the media, it seems that rich people are the plague of your society. They enjoy their easy lifestyle, they don't work much, they get richer, and they need to be taxed more. Can you apply some common sense and logic instead of emotion, and try to figure it out?

Let's say a rich person makes $200 million a year. First of all, she must be providing products or services which are used by other people – people like you. How otherwise she would be making so much money? So, whatever she does, it is useful to society in one way or another! She can’t provide products and services by herself, therefore she is hiring other people, and thus creating jobs. Second of all, she probably pays half of that amount or maybe even more in taxes to federal, state and local governments. Thus, rich people in your society support the bulk of expenses needed to fund your governments.

Let's say a rich person has $120 million, and she is free to do whatever she wants with her money. How many houses, boats, and clothing can one person buy? Let's say a rich person spends $20 million on all of that. Keep in mind that every purchased house, boat, car, etc. had to be manufactured and will need some work and servicing done, which would involve hiring other people to do the job, buying materials, and parts. This creates jobs and stimulates the economy. What happens with another $100 million? Consider different scenarios.

A rich person can put $100 million in the bank and do nothing while collecting interest on this amount. Even a modest interest of 3% would yield a cool sum of $3 million a year. What some people don't realize is that the bank is able to loan this money to others – individuals and businesses – enabling someone to get an education loan, a business expansion loan, or a mortgage – thus stimulating your economy.

A rich person can invest the $100 million in a successful enterprise, thus creating more jobs and stimulating the economy even further. Many rich people contribute significant sums of moneys to charities. This enables those charities to help other people in need.

I could provide more examples. However, the important point is that no matter what rich people do with their money, it ultimately benefits your society. The only thing rich people are able to do is to make a decision where the money should be spent. Being intimately involved in their enterprises, rich people have a good sense of where to direct their money. The only way they can make money is to provide useful products and services to other people – people like you.

Their direct dependency on such outcome forces them to invest prudently and successfully.

Now, wait a second! Isn't the government also makes a sole decision how your taxes should be spent? But does the government care how to spend your money? It's not their money to spend, so why would they really care that much? Governments consist of humans, and we already discussed human behavior. And if there isn't enough money to spend, governments can always increase taxes or print more money. And if the public doesn't like it, the government will always come up with an explanation of why taxes need to be raised and money need to be printed.

Because the public does not have real control over governments, people either accept an explanation, or are left frustrated with no way out.

It seems that rich people deserve to have that extra money... There is another factor you may not realize. A rich person is at least partially enslaved by their fortune. Why? They need to manage their money. Others will be constantly asking for their money. It is a headache. They cannot move freely being afraid for their safety, and thus lose some of their freedom. They are concerned about their privacy. Their lives have ups and downs, and at times they are pretty lonely. They often don't have real friends because they can't trust anyone – all of that because of their money. It is a fancy lifestyle at times, but not as glamorous other times. Their lives can be pretty empty on a deeper level.

For example, did you know that a significant percentage of people who won a lottery ended up worse then before? Lost friends, broken up families, drugs, and loneliness are some tell-tails of those winnings.

There is a long term fundamental factor which plays an important role in dividing your country into the rich and the poor, increasing this divide, and fostering anger of the poor against the rich. Continuous speeches and actions of politicians advocating help to poor people at the expense of rich people create an atmosphere of hatred towards rich people while at the same time encouraging poor people to be more dependent on the government.

The resultant long term effect on the minds of poor people leads to a perception of rich people as being crooks that somehow managed to get wealthy. Another long term effect leads to the idea that poor people are not responsible for their own well being. The government is their only friend, and the rich are their enemies and therefore should share their wealth. The only real outcome of such policies is that poor people are discouraged from being proactive in improving their circumstances.

This is what leads to the increased divide between the rich and the poor.

If you are a poor person, you have the power to change things for the better. You have to think long and hard about a long term solution which may work for you. This should become the only focus of your life. You may posses a hidden talent you may not be aware of. The only way to find out is to keep thinking and trying in a constructive manner. There are plenty of examples of poor people becoming successful. Study them, and maybe you will get some ideas. I guarantee that you will be inspired by some of the stories you read. Educate yourself in whatever area you are pursuing. Even if you fail at first, you will earn respect of others.

Years go by no matter what you do. Spend your time wisely. It is the most treasured commodity you still own – something no one can take away from you. It would be a shame to throw it away or spend on something you will regret later in life.

 

[IG.]

Killing America Slowly, Chapter 19

From the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Killing America Slowly

CHAPTER 19

Ethical aspect of money

It is ironic that I, the Devil, need to educate you in some areas of your life. But, like I said before, I am being honest and sincere in my evil intentions, regardless of whether they are good or bad.

Dealing with money on a daily basis makes you forget or not even realize what is the nature of money and what it represents. As a result, it is easy to make a lapse in judgment about yourself and others.

Money facilitates a mechanism of product and service exchange by creating a money record of such exchange. You provide a product or a service to someone, and get another product or service in return. It's that simple. Because so many entities participate in such exchange it is impossible to keep track who owns who and how much, although a computer system of the future could handle such task, and maybe then we wouldn't need money at all.

One amazing conclusion from this deeper understanding of money is that the more money someone made, the more useful products or services such person provided to others, and therefore the more such person contributed to society. So, next time you think about a rich person, please focus on their contribution to society and not on the money record associated with it. If someone contributes little or nothing to society, why other people have to provide to such person products or services of greater value than was the contribution?

There is another important conclusion. When someone prints, steals, or takes away your money, they force you to work without any compensation to you. When a criminal prints money, steals money, or directly steals products and services, you call it a crime. It is not a norm, and although you incur a temporary suffering, you try to move on and put it behind.

When your government prints money, or takes it away from you – isn't this also a crime? It is true, governments need money to function – perform their governing duties. Most people would have no problem with that. However, governments go way beyond that and take away much more than they need to perform their governing duties – to increase their power, to expand their bureaucracies, and to pursue their own agendas. I can only reiterate: when someone prints, steals, or takes away your money, they force you to provide your products or services without any compensation to you. How would you like to work for the government for free and without any compensation for prolonged periods of time – like a month, two months, or four months out of a year? But you already do – in the form of various taxes and fees amounting to a big chunk of your annual income. You have no choice but to continue doing so in the future. Does this sound like a form of slavery? If you don't believe it is – try to get out of it or even resist to it, and see what happens.

This did not happen overnight. It was a slow and gradual process. Government simply took it upon itself to gradually take away more, and more, and more. Very few noticed. Very few objected.

And you are calling me evil...