FX Bandit
Established member
- Messages
- 530
- Likes
- 95
This is true.
This is true.
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
Who are rewarded on a massive scale for wrecking up the nation.
No other country rewards failure on a collosal scale as we do.
Guy steals a pound of sugar from Tescos to make ends meet - he gets sacked and a police record.
Some rich focker who doesn't need money steals millions - wrecks a bank, gets a freaking golden handshake with 10 parachutes attached so his tender reputation is not damaged.
Few students break some windows and the BBC and Paxman gives the Students Union lady a hard time about ****ing morality of rights and wrongs.
Not one banker or FSA **** head has been sacked for screwing on a global scale.
This is England!
We do need a revolution.
At the bank and on these blogs everyone ****ing argues against progressive taxation. Everyone bangs their drum about flat rate taxation. However, if anyone looks at bank bonuses it is based on salary grading.
Grades 1-5 get 5% - Usually these are people on low wages.
Grades 6-7 get 10%
Grades 7-9 get 15%
Grade 10s get 30% bonuses...
You get the picture. Also the higher the scale bigger the salary. So go figure - work effort and reward payouts...
The whole system is so ****ed up and tilted in favour of the rich ******s and now education will be priced out for the underpaid working classes.
This is to enable the white collar dumb **** elite to maintain their freaking power base.
I do think we need a revolution indeed. Let's hope the Queen can save the country from the eton infested daft politicians.
I'm not a communist or anarchist either - just a capitalist with a social conscience.
FX Bandit
Established member
- Messages
- 530
- Likes
- 95
Who was this? How much did he steal and how was he able to escape punishment?
What happened in the sugar case at Tesco's? Have you got a link to the story?
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
You serious? :-0
The Tesco case was long time ago when I was at secondary school - 1980s and the internet was not invented back then...
Just googled this one... http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100523141355AAogksN
As for the bankers - not one got sacked or dismissed. Only one the Norhern Rock twit retired on health grounds.
I take it you don't read the local or national newspapers.
What is your point - humour me.
Last edited:
counter_violent
Legendary member
- Messages
- 12,637
- Likes
- 3,780
So Atilla, finally we seem to be reaching some common ground
I long ago gave up with mainstream politics .
The only way to vote in recent times has been that of protest vote, ie vote for anything that gets the backs up of mainstream politicians.
But now it seems that a new era of allegiances could be forged.
So a simple question then...what are we all doing about it ?
I long ago gave up with mainstream politics .
The only way to vote in recent times has been that of protest vote, ie vote for anything that gets the backs up of mainstream politicians.
But now it seems that a new era of allegiances could be forged.
So a simple question then...what are we all doing about it ?
dick_dastardly
Established member
- Messages
- 843
- Likes
- 152
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
So Atilla, finally we seem to be reaching some common ground
I long ago gave up with mainstream politics .
The only way to vote in recent times has been that of protest vote, ie vote for anything that gets the backs up of mainstream politicians.
But now it seems that a new era of allegiances could be forged.
So a simple question then...what are we all doing about it ?
Well I voted Liberal and thought the unity with the Tories was a good one.
However, typical ****s - got their heads up their arses and gone too far with the cuts and more importantly education.
I got a full grant and if not for it could never have got to University. I was the only one who got in from my school at the time. I'm from off the street. I don't like what is happening right now.
Cutting on social services and jobs bad idea right now.
Cutting on wellfare payout is good - especially the elderly - cost too much to maintain decrepid people who are in vegetation state. That money should be invested in the young.
Spending money on defence and nuclear **** is also a waste of resource. I can't see any country invading the UK. I also can't see what countries we could possibly want to nuke. Daft sods. Don't know why we need an aircraft carrier either? Defence is ok but we seem to be spending shed loads on offensive weapons. What is wrong with people?
Only good thing is to keep rates low and taxation high. I would introduce progressive taxation. I would tax banks and finance and subsidise manufacturing academies. Bring back unions cause they have a better idea of industry than fat cat management ******s who know FA but talk in meetings.
If bankers want to leave London - let them... Thatcher sacrificied our industrys. Heseltine wanted to keep Westland and she went the US way. Remember the bust ups? Stupid mad cow. Self regulation and privatisation selling utilities to foreigners and now we pay stupid charges.
Certainly would take a revolution.
What do you reckon?
counter_violent
Legendary member
- Messages
- 12,637
- Likes
- 3,780
Take your pick depending on the area of the country you live in.
Any small protest type party that has anti mainstream policies.
FX Bandit
Established member
- Messages
- 530
- Likes
- 95
No, I would have been very young then if it was in the 80s.
No point at all, I just wondered who stole what and how they escaped punishment. But it appears that that didn't actually happen, did it?
counter_violent
Legendary member
- Messages
- 12,637
- Likes
- 3,780
Well I voted Liberal and thought the unity with the Tories was a good one.
However, typical ****s - got their heads up their arses and gone too far with the cuts and more importantly education.
I got a full grant and if not for it could never have got to University. I was the only one who got in from my school at the time. I'm from off the street. I don't like what is happening right now.
Cutting on social services and jobs bad idea right now.
Cutting on wellfare payout is good - especially the elderly - cost too much to maintain decrepid people who are in vegetation state. That money should be invested in the young.
Spending money on defence and nuclear **** is also a waste of resource. I can't see any country invading the UK. I also can't see what countries we could possibly want to nuke. Daft sods. Don't know why we need an aircraft carrier either? Defence is ok but we seem to be spending shed loads on offensive weapons. What is wrong with people?
Only good thing is to keep rates low and taxation high. I would introduce progressive taxation. I would tax banks and finance and subsidise manufacturing academies. Bring back unions cause they have a better idea of industry than fat cat management ******s who know FA but talk in meetings.
If bankers want to leave London - let them... Thatcher sacrificied our industrys. Heseltine wanted to keep Westland and she went the US way. Remember the bust ups? Stupid mad cow. Self regulation and privatisation selling utilities to foreigners and now we pay stupid charges.
Certainly would take a revolution.
What do you reckon?
I recon you didn't watch the vid.
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
I recon you didn't watch the vid.
Watched half of it. Don't agree with the severity of situ.
UK has earning ability and debt not as bad as they make it out.
I'm optimistic and there is a future for the UK. This is an ideal moment to make some headway with fostering bilateral trading relations with other countries.
Visits to India and China great. Not sure about lecturing China on human rights when ours is so poor. We should stay out of other countries politics and wars and just trade. Arrogance of Cameron. We don't do torture, torture is abhorant and then go and preach human rights. Yes but we are fighting two humane wars aren't we. Ofcourse we are.
counter_violent
Legendary member
- Messages
- 12,637
- Likes
- 3,780
Well actually the second half of the vid is the interesting part.
Reducing govt to a fraction of where we are now.
Reducing taxation to 20% max for everyone. 0% for the lowest earners.
Reducing benefits etc etc etc .
Reducing restrictive legislation.
In short, getting govt off the backs of everyone in order that everyone can find their rightful level and place in society. All within the framework of a full free market economy.
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
That does sound interesting. I'll watch the latter half tomorrow in that case.
All four points sound very desirable objectives. I think the judicial process needs reworking too.
I'll vote for that manifesto...
counter_violent
Legendary member
- Messages
- 12,637
- Likes
- 3,780
I'll vote for that manifesto...
I will of course need a deputy PM.
Perks include a mistress and 2 jags !
Up for it ?
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
I will of course need a deputy PM.
Perks include a mistress and 2 jags !
Up for it ?
Great just my kind of work...
Do I get to play croquet and drink afternoon tea too... :clap:
Pat494
Legendary member
- Messages
- 14,614
- Likes
- 1,588
Might as well jack-in EU membership too. On cost for return basis it's an absolute financial disaster for those countries trying hard. The rest ( the PIIGS ) are being carried by Britain, France and Germany.
All we get are daft laws made up by overpaid F*CKING wank*rs in Brussels and a bill of billions every year.
All we get are daft laws made up by overpaid F*CKING wank*rs in Brussels and a bill of billions every year.
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
Yep certainly do!
I don't mind the common market but these guys in Brussels make the old Politbereau central planning system look like a cake walk.
Where is the accountability to the people?
Another thing that gets up my nose is the Pizza - how can any body patent a piece of food made by people as belonging to a fixed bunch of people when trading.
If the Chinese want to make pizza's and sell them as pizza's they should be able to. The same people then stand up and talk about freedom and human rights.
Stupid daft effing sods.
Really feeling like ranting this weeekend. Is it the 13th or a full moon or somefin
?Go out on the streets, like the students did, and break the ****ing place up!
counter_violent
Legendary member
- Messages
- 12,637
- Likes
- 3,780
from The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. XXXI No. 2: Lessons of the Financial Crisis, March 1908.
The solution of the problem of a central bank, with power to control the currency of the United States, to be at all adequate, must depend upon and be controlled by ultimate political principles. The same principle that underlies the never-ending conflict between the advocates of a strong centralized government and what are called "states rights," governs this question. Taught in the school of experience and adversity, the early English and American patriots learned the salutary lesson that the development of peoples, as well as their happiness, depended more upon liberty—that is, the power to control and govern themselves, rather than to be controlled or governed by anybody else—than upon any other single thing ; and they, therefore, in drafting our Constitution, always viewed government as an evil made necessary by the weakness and defects of human nature, and never extended it beyond that necessity.
Under the plan of freedom, of self-reliance, self-dependence, self-government, we have become the greatest, the happiest, the most powerful people of the world ; but notwithstanding these proofs to justify the work of the Fathers, we have more and more concluded that we could have done a great deal better. We are rapidly tending in the opposite direction, which must inevitably destroy liberty by vesting all discretion in some form of central government, rather than in the people as individual, independent entities.
Starting with the theory that government but existed because of the defects of mankind, and was but an evil wherever it exceeded the necessity of restraining evil human tendencies, we have now reached the higher light wherein we produce schemes of regulating everything, until liberty is but a name, and we govern ourselves by theories entirely independent of the characteristics of the people to whom our systems are to apply. It is difficult to find any one, nowadays, who has not some "counsel of perfection," and founded on it, some theory of government that would work perfectly with a perfect race, in whom neither self-interest nor passion existed and that, consequently, did not need any government at all.
Among the radical reformers, the Nihilists are much more logical than the Socialists because neither system would work with human nature as it is, and no system would be required with society so constituted as to make their theories practicable. But the strangest development of modern times is that, concurrently with the wildest theories against restraint, popular opinion is forcing more and more restraint upon individual freedom of choice, that is liberty, year by year ; until business and everything else is being stifled by the almost incomprehensible mass of liberty-restraining laws and regulations. I suppose to-day the American people imagine they are a free people ; but in the sense that they were free in the days of such lesser lights as Washington and Franklin and Jefferson and Hamilton—that is, free to work out their individual independence and salvation, unrestrained by any unnecessary laws—they are veritable slaves. Under the leadership of the wonderful statesmen of our age who, not confined to either party, have a legislative panacea for everything and are making us happy by passing statutes binding us hand and foot on one subject after another, all the while increasing public officials and public burdens to enforce them, real liberty—liberty in the sense that each man must, to the greatest possible extent, be given free discretion to work out his own salvation—is rapidly ceasing to exist.
But, it may be asked, what has all this to do with a central bank? My answer is, everything. For this country to be great, happy and prosperous, it must be really free ; and freedom, just as justice, consists in distributing power and opportunity as equally as possible, and as much controlled by everybody's individual, untrammeled discretion as the nature of things will permit. I am as much opposed to undue centralization as I am to Socialism or Nihilism, and for an identical reason : They are all enemies of liberty ; and it is only through liberty that mankind can reach the highest forms of development.
Now, what effect will the central bank idea have upon these principles which I have thus, I fear crudely, stated? If it will tend to an equalization of power and opportunity, if it will tend to placing, as near as may be, equal powers and equal restraints upon everybody, it is consistent with the spirit of our institutions and the purpose of our civilization ; and if not, being against them, it must prove injurious. There is not the slighest doubt that the placing of the power, in the hands of a single man or a small body of men, to issue at his or their uncontrolled will the currency needed for trade, would prove, at least for awhile, an effective measure. I doubt whether it would permanently prove so, because all history has shown that, in the result, the placing of too much power anywhere, in its rotting-out effect upon peoples, has decreased efficiency. There is no more doubt that the creations of dictatorial powers, for short periods, in such times, for instance, as those of Cincinnatus, were effective measures, than that they were enormously and even to the point of destruction, inefficient as a permanent system, under the Emperors. Where a single man can temporarily wield the effective powers of millions of men developed by freedom, he is nearly irresistible ; but the continuance of that power, by destroying the value of the units, brings down the totality of strength, even to the point of extinction.
And so, if we had a central bank, with the power of practically fixing the price of every commodity in the United States, of aggregating to itself, or those who exercised its powers, just such proportion of the production of wealth of the Union as they saw fit ; it would, in a little while, tend to a selfish use that could be neither effective nor beneficial ; and, like all other forms of inordinate and unequal power, it must become destructive of any republican form of government. Procuring efficiency, not through evolution and development, but tyranny and inequality, is a means that all human experience has demonstrated to be fallacious.
In my own judgment, our currency, like our other evils, is to be remedied by greater freedom and greater distribution of choice and discretion, rather than by a greater centralization or unequal distribution of power. It is a fair question to ask, therefore, whether conceding, as I do, that there is not sufficient elasticity of the currency, I can suggest no remedy, but would prefer present evils to those resulting from the creation of too centralized a power ; and the answer, to my mind, is obvious. The true remedy must be found, not in placing our dependence upon the discretion of any one, but of every one,—that is, again, upon liberty, rather than upon power and restraint.
We have a very satisfactory system of regulating the investments of saving funds, that demonstrates that a line of investment can be easily named in advance by statute that would be a safe basis for currency, as well as for investments, as at present. In my judgment, therefore, starting with government bonds, which should always be given a great advantage in currency issues, as that strengthens the credit of the Union, a list could be made upon which any bank—and, again, the banking laws should be equally open to all—could issue its notes. A system of taxation on such issues should be so regulated as to make inordinate inflation impossible ; but there should be no limit to the amount of circulation when the tax had reached a point where it must become unprofitable to the banks that take out that circulation, for then they would only take it out to save the commercial community and their customers, and for no dangerous purposes. And this currency so available should be available at the discretion of everyone, without the necessity of consulting any government official or any government bank. I do not want to be misunderstood. The restrictions as to security should be full and ample, the taxation large and on an ascending scale. The currency should be made absolutely safe—as safe as it is now—and the tax collected with such a system, if that tax were properly applied, would not only be sufficient to guard every holder of a note against loss, but would yield large revenues beyond this to the government in relief of general taxation. With such a system worked out in detail, governmental power would not be increased, the danger of depriving the people of any part of their self-developing discretions would not be incurred.
This, as I have said, is all very crudely stated by a man who has no opportunity to work out details or polish sentences ; but it recommends itself to me, because my whole study of the constitutional history of our peoples has convinced me that liberty is the greatest friend of mankind, just as inordinate powers are the greatest danger. We shall go higher and better and further, following out, in all our troubles, a liberty as wide as human defects will permit, than hunting around for benevolent despots in any form, for I do not believe that even benevolent despots ever do real good, because, however well they may govern, the injury to communities inflicted by taking from them the educational benefits of self-government is incalculable.
Both religion and science teach us that human advance is but to be gained through the slower methods of development of character—the one calling it "regeneration," the other "evolution" or "survival of the fittest," or what you will. Even in politics and by politicians these principles are at times heeded—even now we are daily told that the policy of the government is to educate the Filipinos to a fitness for self-government, by gradually entrusting them with widening discretions, increased liberty, as this increasing liberty fits them for more. This is true political science—the only way—these men are unquestionably Filipino patriots, but what we need is American patriots—men who will "make way for liberty" here as well as there ; who will disregard popularity, if need be, that they may abide with duty ; and not piecemeal exchange our birthright of freedom for a mass of legislation and restraint only really effective for evil. Many, many injurious steps have already been taken toward the inequality and slavery of over-government and benumbing restriction. But all of them will be but a drop in the bucket, compared with the dangers of placing in the hands of the few the entire discretion as to the volume of the people's money.
In an ultimate analysis, our country is only languishing for liberty and equality ; and I do not hesitate to predict an instant return of prosperity, at the first moment that honest men can make investments and conduct important affairs, without the necessity of having a lawyer at their elbows, who, indeed, in most cases, refuses the responsibility of advising what all the accumulating mass of restrictive legislation means. We have evils enough in this direction, without restraining the people's right to determine when or to what extent their interests require a further supply of currency on a sound basis. If we really need all the present restrictive mass of regulative legislation, we are, like the Filipinos, already unfit for freedom ; and if, as I believe, we do not, by taking away our personal right of choice, of initiative, we are being educated as rapidly as possible, to be like them, unfit for self-government.
If these hasty suggestions should chance to reach the eye of someone with a faculty for leadership, and a love of his country, and invite him to battle again for freedom, to expose the shams under which the people are losing their freedom, under the pretense that their enemies are being punished, I can promise him the ultimate approval of his countrymen. For that, in the end and permanently, only comes to real patriots, those that unite instead of divide, those that love instead of hate ; those that, putting aside "malice, envy and all uncharitableness," understand the potency of "good will to men," while never forgetting that "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
The solution of the problem of a central bank, with power to control the currency of the United States, to be at all adequate, must depend upon and be controlled by ultimate political principles. The same principle that underlies the never-ending conflict between the advocates of a strong centralized government and what are called "states rights," governs this question. Taught in the school of experience and adversity, the early English and American patriots learned the salutary lesson that the development of peoples, as well as their happiness, depended more upon liberty—that is, the power to control and govern themselves, rather than to be controlled or governed by anybody else—than upon any other single thing ; and they, therefore, in drafting our Constitution, always viewed government as an evil made necessary by the weakness and defects of human nature, and never extended it beyond that necessity.
Under the plan of freedom, of self-reliance, self-dependence, self-government, we have become the greatest, the happiest, the most powerful people of the world ; but notwithstanding these proofs to justify the work of the Fathers, we have more and more concluded that we could have done a great deal better. We are rapidly tending in the opposite direction, which must inevitably destroy liberty by vesting all discretion in some form of central government, rather than in the people as individual, independent entities.
Starting with the theory that government but existed because of the defects of mankind, and was but an evil wherever it exceeded the necessity of restraining evil human tendencies, we have now reached the higher light wherein we produce schemes of regulating everything, until liberty is but a name, and we govern ourselves by theories entirely independent of the characteristics of the people to whom our systems are to apply. It is difficult to find any one, nowadays, who has not some "counsel of perfection," and founded on it, some theory of government that would work perfectly with a perfect race, in whom neither self-interest nor passion existed and that, consequently, did not need any government at all.
Among the radical reformers, the Nihilists are much more logical than the Socialists because neither system would work with human nature as it is, and no system would be required with society so constituted as to make their theories practicable. But the strangest development of modern times is that, concurrently with the wildest theories against restraint, popular opinion is forcing more and more restraint upon individual freedom of choice, that is liberty, year by year ; until business and everything else is being stifled by the almost incomprehensible mass of liberty-restraining laws and regulations. I suppose to-day the American people imagine they are a free people ; but in the sense that they were free in the days of such lesser lights as Washington and Franklin and Jefferson and Hamilton—that is, free to work out their individual independence and salvation, unrestrained by any unnecessary laws—they are veritable slaves. Under the leadership of the wonderful statesmen of our age who, not confined to either party, have a legislative panacea for everything and are making us happy by passing statutes binding us hand and foot on one subject after another, all the while increasing public officials and public burdens to enforce them, real liberty—liberty in the sense that each man must, to the greatest possible extent, be given free discretion to work out his own salvation—is rapidly ceasing to exist.
But, it may be asked, what has all this to do with a central bank? My answer is, everything. For this country to be great, happy and prosperous, it must be really free ; and freedom, just as justice, consists in distributing power and opportunity as equally as possible, and as much controlled by everybody's individual, untrammeled discretion as the nature of things will permit. I am as much opposed to undue centralization as I am to Socialism or Nihilism, and for an identical reason : They are all enemies of liberty ; and it is only through liberty that mankind can reach the highest forms of development.
Now, what effect will the central bank idea have upon these principles which I have thus, I fear crudely, stated? If it will tend to an equalization of power and opportunity, if it will tend to placing, as near as may be, equal powers and equal restraints upon everybody, it is consistent with the spirit of our institutions and the purpose of our civilization ; and if not, being against them, it must prove injurious. There is not the slighest doubt that the placing of the power, in the hands of a single man or a small body of men, to issue at his or their uncontrolled will the currency needed for trade, would prove, at least for awhile, an effective measure. I doubt whether it would permanently prove so, because all history has shown that, in the result, the placing of too much power anywhere, in its rotting-out effect upon peoples, has decreased efficiency. There is no more doubt that the creations of dictatorial powers, for short periods, in such times, for instance, as those of Cincinnatus, were effective measures, than that they were enormously and even to the point of destruction, inefficient as a permanent system, under the Emperors. Where a single man can temporarily wield the effective powers of millions of men developed by freedom, he is nearly irresistible ; but the continuance of that power, by destroying the value of the units, brings down the totality of strength, even to the point of extinction.
And so, if we had a central bank, with the power of practically fixing the price of every commodity in the United States, of aggregating to itself, or those who exercised its powers, just such proportion of the production of wealth of the Union as they saw fit ; it would, in a little while, tend to a selfish use that could be neither effective nor beneficial ; and, like all other forms of inordinate and unequal power, it must become destructive of any republican form of government. Procuring efficiency, not through evolution and development, but tyranny and inequality, is a means that all human experience has demonstrated to be fallacious.
In my own judgment, our currency, like our other evils, is to be remedied by greater freedom and greater distribution of choice and discretion, rather than by a greater centralization or unequal distribution of power. It is a fair question to ask, therefore, whether conceding, as I do, that there is not sufficient elasticity of the currency, I can suggest no remedy, but would prefer present evils to those resulting from the creation of too centralized a power ; and the answer, to my mind, is obvious. The true remedy must be found, not in placing our dependence upon the discretion of any one, but of every one,—that is, again, upon liberty, rather than upon power and restraint.
We have a very satisfactory system of regulating the investments of saving funds, that demonstrates that a line of investment can be easily named in advance by statute that would be a safe basis for currency, as well as for investments, as at present. In my judgment, therefore, starting with government bonds, which should always be given a great advantage in currency issues, as that strengthens the credit of the Union, a list could be made upon which any bank—and, again, the banking laws should be equally open to all—could issue its notes. A system of taxation on such issues should be so regulated as to make inordinate inflation impossible ; but there should be no limit to the amount of circulation when the tax had reached a point where it must become unprofitable to the banks that take out that circulation, for then they would only take it out to save the commercial community and their customers, and for no dangerous purposes. And this currency so available should be available at the discretion of everyone, without the necessity of consulting any government official or any government bank. I do not want to be misunderstood. The restrictions as to security should be full and ample, the taxation large and on an ascending scale. The currency should be made absolutely safe—as safe as it is now—and the tax collected with such a system, if that tax were properly applied, would not only be sufficient to guard every holder of a note against loss, but would yield large revenues beyond this to the government in relief of general taxation. With such a system worked out in detail, governmental power would not be increased, the danger of depriving the people of any part of their self-developing discretions would not be incurred.
This, as I have said, is all very crudely stated by a man who has no opportunity to work out details or polish sentences ; but it recommends itself to me, because my whole study of the constitutional history of our peoples has convinced me that liberty is the greatest friend of mankind, just as inordinate powers are the greatest danger. We shall go higher and better and further, following out, in all our troubles, a liberty as wide as human defects will permit, than hunting around for benevolent despots in any form, for I do not believe that even benevolent despots ever do real good, because, however well they may govern, the injury to communities inflicted by taking from them the educational benefits of self-government is incalculable.
Both religion and science teach us that human advance is but to be gained through the slower methods of development of character—the one calling it "regeneration," the other "evolution" or "survival of the fittest," or what you will. Even in politics and by politicians these principles are at times heeded—even now we are daily told that the policy of the government is to educate the Filipinos to a fitness for self-government, by gradually entrusting them with widening discretions, increased liberty, as this increasing liberty fits them for more. This is true political science—the only way—these men are unquestionably Filipino patriots, but what we need is American patriots—men who will "make way for liberty" here as well as there ; who will disregard popularity, if need be, that they may abide with duty ; and not piecemeal exchange our birthright of freedom for a mass of legislation and restraint only really effective for evil. Many, many injurious steps have already been taken toward the inequality and slavery of over-government and benumbing restriction. But all of them will be but a drop in the bucket, compared with the dangers of placing in the hands of the few the entire discretion as to the volume of the people's money.
In an ultimate analysis, our country is only languishing for liberty and equality ; and I do not hesitate to predict an instant return of prosperity, at the first moment that honest men can make investments and conduct important affairs, without the necessity of having a lawyer at their elbows, who, indeed, in most cases, refuses the responsibility of advising what all the accumulating mass of restrictive legislation means. We have evils enough in this direction, without restraining the people's right to determine when or to what extent their interests require a further supply of currency on a sound basis. If we really need all the present restrictive mass of regulative legislation, we are, like the Filipinos, already unfit for freedom ; and if, as I believe, we do not, by taking away our personal right of choice, of initiative, we are being educated as rapidly as possible, to be like them, unfit for self-government.
If these hasty suggestions should chance to reach the eye of someone with a faculty for leadership, and a love of his country, and invite him to battle again for freedom, to expose the shams under which the people are losing their freedom, under the pretense that their enemies are being punished, I can promise him the ultimate approval of his countrymen. For that, in the end and permanently, only comes to real patriots, those that unite instead of divide, those that love instead of hate ; those that, putting aside "malice, envy and all uncharitableness," understand the potency of "good will to men," while never forgetting that "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
"I got a full grant and without it I could never have gone to University"
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones - talk about wasting taxpayers money!
