Pages

Thursday, November 06, 2008

Energy Conservation & Globalized America






By Mike - Jun 18th, 2008 at 6:38 pm EDT
Also listed in: Barack Obama sponsors Fair Elections Now Act West Seattle for Obama



There have been a lot of changes in the past 100 years. Not only have we seen gang activity increase along with crimes, but so has energy consumption. The other change I realized was the recinding of the "Sunday Laws" across the united states.

Originally, the sunday law were instituted to make sure that people wouldn't have to choose between work and church. Often, the nobility would use financial enticements toward the religious heads of households in order to coherce them to work in order to increase his own financial gain. This was unfair to those who needed money, feared losing their means of supporting themselves, and without such a law banning people from working (though I don't believe it applied to you working for your own business), people would be further burdened.

I have to wonder if there weren't more benefits to this. First, without businesses being open, your kids would have nowhere to go for entertainment. Parents would have at least 1 day they could spend with family & friends without having to align work schedules. Decrease in gas use across the board. Less crime (since parents are home on Sundays, there is no reason why you can't keep an eye on them.) Fewer homeless people begging in the street (Since there are no people to beg from). Less Police would be necessary (if any at all... They could go on an "On Call As Needed" basis so they might be able to spend time with family. Neighbors would have time to get to know each other. How well do you know your neighbors now? Have you had any barbecues? Right now, I would guess that most people who may have barbecues, are only hanging out with people who are white collar regardless of the neighborhood you live in. Our work schedules can determine what class you relate to and hardens those lines even more.

So perhaps we should consider enacting a Sunday Law. Not to restrict people from working, but to give liberty to those who can't choose. And imagine the tax dollars that would be saved?

Problem is, I don't believe that this would be acceptable in Washington D.C. and states that collect an Income Tax. That's the real reason why the Sunday Laws were lifted. People could be forced to work more days, some part-time workers without insurance.

Speaking of Insurance... When you are seeing a doctor, you are paying for his time. The amount he charges is dependant upon how many appointments there are. Have you noticed that people have appointments with doctors booked up? Do you think that medical insurance might be the cause of that? Are you more likely to make an appointment when you have insurance or don't? Most of the time when I go to the Doctors Office, there are Seniors filling up the waiting room. In order to maintain the busy schedules, Seniors need health care insurance. This keeps the price of their time up.

So what is the only real solution to the health care issue is? not insurance because you know they make a lot of money from the work they do and have locked in prices lower than what's available to cash paying customers. The truth of the matter is, when you think about it, in order for a person to do well financially, several people have to do poorly. It's not an opinion, it's the truth. If you start a business and are the only employee... either you get paid, or the company get paid. not both. Either you receive a larger portion, or the business does.

Originally when businesses were created in each state, they were granted a franchise to provide a service. They would pay a franchise fee for it, and competitiion was determined by the contract they signed related to the type of business. They were also limited to only that business. The country has changed drastically in the past 100 years... And if you ask me, The American people have been paying so that elected officials can enjoy the step above socialism.

Congress has become what we fought for. There's no denying it. And if people disagree, it's likely because they envision aristocrats to be worse than they were. They don't have to spit in your face, to spit in your face.