Two of my long lasting and deeply respected friends have asked me to look into Gary Johnson’s views more thoroughly after my last posting. After doing so, I took a step further and dredged up some debates between Gary and Jill Stein as I believe she is their favored candidate. Each was very interesting for many different reasons; the first of which was a professional debate by two mature and well educated adults rather than a couple squalling six-year-olds fighting over a paper mache crown. I advise you to take the time to watch all of their debates and interviews which can easily be found on YouTube by typing in: Governor Gary Johnson vs Dr. Jill Stein.
Here a few of the many things that stuck out for me: both of these candidates have good ideas and not so good ideas—no different than any other candidate until Trump and Clinton. I agree we need to return our work force to our own soil, and reattain the self sufficiency we had up until the fifties. But removing corporate taxes to do it is not the answer.
There can be no self sufficiency until all corporation kingdoms are de-monopolized like we did with Mountain Bell and other such conglomerates back in the seventies. I like the idea of the removal of income tax, but remember, since corporations consider themselves a single person, that would be the loophole they need to free themselves from the same tax.
I suggest one way to approach this would be to pose the question in superior court that if a corporation is indeed a single individual, then as equally true of any other single individual, also the product of a collective of cells, any corporation should be held to the same sentence of probations, fines, and incarceration—just as any other individual collective of cells. Case in point: every living being who has ever been imprisoned.
If that can’t be accomplished, ie: the incarceration of every corporate cell from the most mundane employee to the most powerful of shareholders, we have successfully proven without question that a corporation is more than a single collective of individual cells; therefore, proving unanimously the corporation’s previous arguments are clearly false. At that point, the tax breaks garnered from that previous ruling must at once be overturned, and all previous taxes avoided by the previous ruling must be repaid to the government in full.
The TTP, which I hadn’t taken as close a look at as I should have, is certainly tied to my previous statements. Jill has been very clear that she will dissolve that and the NAFTA agreement and any other such trade agreements. However, she made no mention of the manner in which she will gain the cooperation of the senate, house, and corporations in attaining that goal. The same remains true of Gary and his intent to remove government programs like social security and the like.
The problem here still remains the same. Neither he nor Jill nor any former candidate is really saying, “This is what I will do,” but rather, “this is what I intend to do,” vs the rest of the government’s collective intent to go on doing what they have been doing all along.
We’ve seen those kinds of promises rained down on us election after election. How many of those promises were delivered as they were described?
Have either the Democrats or Republicans been consistent in this regard?
If the Democrats and Republicans are so very different, and their stances so very different, and their excuse for literally bringing the entire government to a standstill over and over again remains based in those unbendable differences of opinion, then how is it that the single ship they both travel upon continues to sail without hindrance in the same direction with all hands on deck in obvious agreement to continue that course? Moreover, how often have we seen someone jump ship without being pushed off a gangplank?
Once we as a country embrace the truth of those facts, all the veils will be torn from our eyes. We will understand there are no real differences. The truth is our government is made up of only a single-minded entity who has agreed to present to We The People a reality that is no more than a woven tapestry of illusions solely for their benefit and delivered directly to us through every branch of media we are connected to. But we have for many decades given little credence to the many other choices we’ve been offered including The Libertarians and The Green Party.
This is why I want to see Trump and Clinton in national debates alongside Gary Johnson and Jill Stein:
I am all for less government, I am all for less taxes. I am all for keeping government out of the bedroom. I am all for an end to illegal immigration by offering those without criminal records entry with a work visa. Also, we cannot allow a two tier system of wages whereby business owners and corporations alike can capitalize on the suffrage of any one group for their own profiteering. I also agree with the legalization of marijuana.
I would like to see a manageable system that provides simple and nonconvoluted programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Veteran compensations for their service which should include lower interest loans for home loans, honest help with securing employment, and government paid health care, including any required psychological services since each veteran’s condition was brought about through service and sacrifice to our government and for our collective rights as a country. To not offer this would be beyond irresponsible.
I certainly agree with sustainable green energy in place of fossil fuels. Fracking needs to be illegalized as part of that process. I agree we need to take climate change seriously, and although I vehemently disagree with the idea that it can simply be stopped instantly by doing all the things Jill suggests, it can certainly be slowly choked out. But we’ll still have to ride out the current momentum we have allowed it to reach as of this moment. There is no such thing as an emergency brake we can use to avert it instantly.
Lastly, I do not agree we should just write off all student debt. That is a debt accepted in complete and conscious agreement. We knew precisely what we were agreeing to when we accepted it. We knew without question that there were no guarantees of immediate employment upon graduation in the field of any student’s study. If we say, “ohhh, don’t worry about that, forget about it.” What have we really said?
We’ve really said, “In America, if you are a student, you don’t have to embrace your personal responsibilities in lieu of your own decisions—the same responsibility which the rest of us students who’ve already paid off our loans under the same or similar conditions have managed to do. Why should that expectation be any different for the students of the present?”
We have more than enough irresponsibility in this country as things stand now—this will only encourage more of that same mentality.
There are other issues, pro and con, I have as well, but I’ve already gone on much longer than I intended to, so I’ll shut the hell up now.
Cheers everyone, and please seriously consider supporting both of these two candidates. It’s way past time we took a risk on something other than the same losing bet.