Written by a 21 year old female from texas !!

Another Letter - Different Perspective....

Dear Fellow Americans

Many decades have now passed since “We The People” submitted to our government our collective credit card to be used to recklessly create and accumulate debts for goods and services far beyond the taxpayer’s credit limit and ability to repay.

Sadly, “We The People” continue to allow such behaviors despite knowing that the government’s objective is to protect its “Power Base” and it ongoing quest to proliferate its control over Inalienable Rights and Freedoms of all citizens.

Recently, the U.S. Government broadcasted a public notice to all citizens that, much to their shock and dismay, it has misused the people’s credit card to the point that its standing balance has substantially gone over the limit from somewhere between $14 and X number of trillions (depending on political party version).

Subsequent to the government’s admission of the misuse of our credit card, other related facts have surfaced, which includes, but is not limited to the following (and in no specific order):

• It has become standard practice for the government to accrue massive debts without being subject to enforcement of any existing mandated boundaries, limitations, and accountability to the taxpayers. Government refuses to legislate meaningful reform to significantly force government to be openly/transparently accountable to the citizens.

• Government’s long-time fiscal abuses and exploitations has encroached on the nation’s economic well-being and security to the point of being in a state of bankruptcy, which it refuses to acknowledge.

• Government has historically displayed legislative behaviors disguised as good will efforts to be construed as preserving or enhancing our best interest when all of the evidence points to the contrary. These same legislative behaviors are often perceived by many as self-interest acts falling outside of Constitutional parameters. The government adamantly denies such allegations.

• The government has been involved in an international credit scheme in which it borrow from foreign countries to purchase, stockpile, and control resources, which allows government to influence and/or manipulate consumer prices for most any type of goods or services here and abroad for purposes of leveraging inflationary conditions, which is one of the means that covertly allows government to impose backdoor taxes.

• “We The People”, of all political persuasions, continue to observe the fleecing of our nation’s treasure by government while simultaneously choosing to ignore and/or admit our role in allowing government to commit extortion against the taxpayers. And obviously, government isn’t motivated to change its abuses and exploitations because there’s been no genuine consequences imposed by the citizens. When there are no consequences for inappropriate behaviors, why stop?

There is inexhaustible information made accessible to the public that could easily expose quantitatively, and by what methods the government uses to abuse and exploit U.S. citizens. But the government doesn’t at all feel intimidated by the existence of such information. The government well knows that the good citizens will never attempt to search out the information and use it to bring about any effective actions to end the government’s incorrigible abuses and exploitations.

The U.S. Government Has A Solution

In order to correct the existing unsavory state of affairs created by government, the government is requesting that we all work harder, and if necessary, "all" able-bodied "working class" should procure multiple jobs to pay the government more of our money, liberties, and property in order to for the government to maintain the lifestyle by which the government has become accustomed.

The government will also continue to require the citizens to retain it as our debt payment manager. In other words, it will be necessary to cut down our individual living standards in order to pay the government more money to be lavishly squandered while simultaneously seeking new ways to force us all to contribute more than ever before.

You can now sleep at night knowing that the U.S. Government has seen the errors of its way and now wants to attempt to redeem it self by making our lives even more miserable than what we’ve paid them to make it to be over the last 250 years.

Ask yourself these questions:

• By all logic and reason - how can we conclude anything other than the reality that our nation’s income/debt ratio is so profound that it is impossible for taxpayers to substantially reduce our enormous national debt – using current government taxation and spending methods and powers?

• Given the long history of the immense growth of power of political machines and the U.S. Government. And after decades of observing the government’s resistance to enact the types of reforms designed to protect the citizens against special interest influence on government, graft and corruption and its ongoing quests to lessen freedoms and liberties of the people, we are faced with another important question:

“Is our current election system capable of empowering “We the People” to rise above the existing influence of special interests and laws created by the Supreme Court and elected officials to allow themselves loopholes to engage in activities not in the best interest of our nation and to circumvent the spirit and letter of the laws contained in the Constitution?” ~ Anonymous Author

Click to expand...

Before we all start point the proverbial finger...we need to be aware of our own shortcomings. WE THE PEOPLE ARE "SOLELY RESPONSIBLE" FOR OUR SERIOUS SOCIAL DEBACLES. Thus far, our political machines and government have used our money to fulfill their own self-interest...and in the process swamped us in debt that is impossible to repay. The American electorate have ALWAYS had the Constitutional choice to reign over government, but the choice made is obvious. WE ALL turned over our choice and decision making to a bunch of political crooks. We reap what we sow.

"This was written by a 21 yr old female who gets it. It's her future
she's worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big
government state that she's being forced to live in! These solutions are
just common sense in her opinion."

She may or may not "get it."

"Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash
for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans,
blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want
steak and frozen pizza, then get a job."

Some of those foods, while unhealthy, are cheaper. For example one reason that McDonald's is popular is because the have a value menu where people can buy cheap, unhealthy foods. While I do think the essentials like rice, beans, and milk are important, how cost-effective is that? I don't see why people should only have access to powdered milk, rather than actual milk. It's like giving people seeds instead of vegetables, a bit. Frozen pizza can be relatively cheap, so keeping that out of their hands is impractical.


"Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women
Norplant birth control implants or tubal legations. Then, we'll test
recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use
drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job."

There's a lot more to Medicaid than those listed items. It'd be great to have more detail on what exactly she presumes to change. When she says "I'd get women birth control," what exactly does she mean? Is it forced, or offered, or what exactly is she planning to do? It's not practical to say "hey, you can't have sex or use these things if you don't work." Alright, how exactly is the gov't going to enforce that? And by "drugs" she means illegal drugs...? What she's proposing is dangerous in that it could be taken even further.

"Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks?"

I love jokes. That statement is a joke. Is she implying people must live in military barracks? And why there? Does she mean they should also be soldiers?

"You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair.
Your home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be
inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your
own place."

It should be common sense to be responsible with the cleanliness of your home, especially if you don't own the space. I don't like surprise inspections/inventories; that's a great way to instill anger and fear. Police state, much? So no plasma TV, but regular TV is fine? Eh, people don't need plasma TVs or Xboxes, so I guess I can agree with that.

"In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week
or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways
of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We
will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo
and speakers and put that money toward the 'common good..'"

What political ideology is this woman from? This just seems very socialistic and controlling, like the government is regulating your life. What happens when the government moves up from desperate people to lower-class people?

"Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of
the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you
say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider
that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing
absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem."

In a way I don't disagree with this. It's voluntary, but how easy could it become more than that?

"If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at
least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system
rewards them for continuing to make bad choices."

Agreed.

"AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes,
that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will
voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't
welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job."

Oh hell no. That would shift a lot of power to the republicans, I'd imagine, and they happen to like cutting benefits to help themselves.

I liked these emails better when they claimed to be from Bill Cosby.

Deuce said:

I liked these emails better when they claimed to be from Bill Cosby.

Click to expand...

Girls getting it is quite unremarkable too, "Girls can get it any time they like, girls can get it, a fact of life!" as my friend Dr Hook will attest.

Wake said:

"This was written by a 21 yr old female who gets it. It's her future
she's worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big
government state that she's being forced to live in! These solutions are
just common sense in her opinion."

She may or may not "get it."

Click to expand...

There is no 21 old female anyway. This is a chain email. In reality the letter was written by a retired military officer. Granted I completely agree with EVERYTHING he says, for the sake of truth, the 21 year old was made up.

"Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash
for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans,
blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want
steak and frozen pizza, then get a job."

Some of those foods, while unhealthy, are cheaper. For example one reason that McDonald's is popular is because the have a value menu where people can buy cheap, unhealthy foods. While I do think the essentials like rice, beans, and milk are important, how cost-effective is that? I don't see why people should only have access to powdered milk, rather than actual milk. It's like giving people seeds instead of vegetables, a bit. Frozen pizza can be relatively cheap, so keeping that out of their hands is impractical.

Click to expand...

Completely false. Rice and beans are vastly cheaper than McDonalds food. It's way way more cost effective at the store, than McD's. It's amazing how ignorant the left is on these matters.

For example: One gallon of milk, is $2.50 at the store. 1 Gallon = 128 Ounces. One large 32 ounce coke at McD's is $1.59.
One gallon of coke at McD's is $6.36. And that's not really all coke is it? The cup is 32 oz, but half of it is ice.

Another example: Rice is $6.99 for a 10 lbs bag. That 10 pound bag can make about 24 servings of rice, at one cup each. That's 29¢ a meal.

Another example: Refried Black Beans 12 cans 20 ounce each, for $21. Each can is two meals worth. That works out to 87¢ a meal.

Let's even look at the basics. McDonald's Quarter Pounder right now is going for (roughly) $3.50. (prices vary by location).
Boneless Steak $3.99 /lbs.. Pork Tenderloin $2.99 /lbs. Chicken Tenders $2.49 /lbs.

Now what's the point? The point is, you can get an entire pound of meat at the store, for about the same price as a 1/4 pounder at McD's.

In other words, yes, buying from the store is ALWAYS cost effective. Always! In fact, if you have been to fiscal management classes (like I have), the first thing they tell you to do is stop going to restaurants! Save money and buy food at a store, and fix it at home.

It's vastly cheaper to buy at the store, and fix at home. No, the reason people go to McDonald's is A: they are lazy and don't want to fix food. B: they like the taste. Those are the reasons.

"Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women
Norplant birth control implants or tubal legations. Then, we'll test
recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use
drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job."

There's a lot more to Medicaid than those listed items. It'd be great to have more detail on what exactly she presumes to change. When she says "I'd get women birth control," what exactly does she mean? Is it forced, or offered, or what exactly is she planning to do? It's not practical to say "hey, you can't have sex or use these things if you don't work." Alright, how exactly is the gov't going to enforce that? And by "drugs" she means illegal drugs...? What she's proposing is dangerous in that it could be taken even further.

Click to expand...

I am a firm believer that when someone is living off of the public, the public has the right to dictate how you live. If you have a job, and earn your own money, you can live however you want.

So yes, forced birth control seems agreeable to me.

"Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks?"

I love jokes. That statement is a joke. Is she implying people must live in military barracks? And why there? Does she mean they should also be soldiers?

Click to expand...

It means they should live in the bare minimum housing required to survive. No AC. No 3 bed rooms, or nice carpet. No nice living area. It means like a studio apartment. Give the people leeching off society a reason, an internal motive to improve themselves.

Make them think "hey... I don't want to live in this sparse tiny place! I need to get a job so I can get a real apartment!"

"You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair.
Your home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be
inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your
own place."

It should be common sense to be responsible with the cleanliness of your home, especially if you don't own the space. I don't like surprise inspections/inventories; that's a great way to instill anger and fear. Police state, much? So no plasma TV, but regular TV is fine? Eh, people don't need plasma TVs or Xboxes, so I guess I can agree with that.

Click to expand...

Police state implies someone is interfering in your place. This isn't "your place". If you are collecting money from the government to live where you live, then that is OUR PLACE. Not yours. Having a surprise inspection of my own property is my own right. Welcome to logic 101.

There is nothing "police state" about having public officials inspect public property, any more than having an officer stop you from tearing up the public library.

"In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week
or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways
of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We
will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo
and speakers and put that money toward the 'common good..'"

What political ideology is this woman from? This just seems very socialistic and controlling, like the government is regulating your life. What happens when the government moves up from desperate people to lower-class people?

Click to expand...

Socialism is controlling private property. It's coming to someone who rightfully own their own stuff, and saying "You can't have an SUV! You can't use tons of electricity! You can't have that religious cross in your yard!"

Socialism is the welfare system itself. Taking money from the public, to give to other people, is socialism. But *IF* we are going to have a welfare system, then yes the government has every right to control and dictate how people live when they are on the system. If you are living off *MY* money, then I have the right to determine how you live.

Well the government can do that any way. But as long as people are not living off the government, then they have no right to tell me how to live. I'm not on welfare, so it doesn't matter what they say.

"Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of
the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you
say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider
that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing
absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem."

In a way I don't disagree with this. It's voluntary, but how easy could it become more than that?

Click to expand...

That could happen anyway. I mean really, we already have the government trying to coerce everyone to have health insurance, even though they don't use government money.

"AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes,
that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will
voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't
welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job."

Oh hell no. That would shift a lot of power to the republicans, I'd imagine, and they happen to like cutting benefits to help themselves.

Click to expand...

Now that's pathetic. So the real reason you are against this is just because of petty political partisanship?

Here's a question: Do you really want the most ignorant and uninformed of society dictating policy to the rest? Isn't that kind of thinking what got us where we are? We're going to force banks to make bad loans to people who can't afford them, for the sake of helping the poor minorities?.... and here we are after a massive economic crash, thanks for much?

Sparkles said:

Completely false. Rice and beans are vastly cheaper than McDonalds food. It's way way more cost effective at the store, than McD's. It's amazing how ignorant the left is on these matters.

Click to expand...

Don't.

The moment you assumed is the moment I stopped taking your post seriously. It's unfortunate, too, because it seemed well-written.

If you want me to take you seriously, show some respect.

Wake said:

Don't.

The moment you assumed is the moment I stopped taking your post seriously. It's unfortunate, too, because it seemed well-written.

If you want me to take you seriously, show some respect.

Click to expand...

You just proved that the shoe fits. Too bad I don't care if you read my posts. Be gone waste of time.