3rd Degree: If We Don’t Like The Truth, Let’s Vote it Something Different, Facts Be Damned. Kids & Poverty/Parenting.

I note, bemused, that Marxist feminist, Queen of Thorns, has been busy all week on Twitter marshalling the Cult of Thorny to ensure tonight’s vote on TV 3’s 3^rd Degree comes out on what they think is the truth for the question: ‘Our Kids: The Problem’s Not Poverty, It’s Parenting’. According to the political Left, it’s poverty, of course, there is no such thing as personal responsibility, thus it can't be parenting, and The Vote will show this because somehow in their minds majoritarism can decide truth, no matter how complex and uncomfortable that truth is.

The Marxists believe, apparently, that a vote based on emotion, and that old bogey of this blog, fairness, can decide the truth and the nature of a thing, regardless of the facts. They will vote for poverty - as they do every national election - and that will justify more redistribution, and the growth of the surveillance state to extract it.

This is wrong on every level, just as democracy has become; throwing away our liberty, thinking the illusory free lunch can be voted into reality.

The question tonight is crippled mainly in its simplicity. Poverty, as regards the question asked, is in big part caused by clueless, irresponsible parenting, so the The Vote tonight for me is a non-issue from the get-go. In a wider view, poverty is now the main by-product of the welfare state: because irresponsible decisions, especially around family size, and family situation, are subsidised and grown by it; see my stories:

Family of eight in Christchurch, complete with criminal record.

Family of nine needing a bigger state house for their Sky remote.

And in a wider context again, poverty is sheeted in by huge government distortion of Western economies, not allowing free markets to do what they do best: provide the best standard of living civilisation has seen, ever.

So while I go to work now, Thorny will ensure her cult votes the truths of her cruel ideology, facts be damned, as the Left will vote in 2014 for more redistribution, hence more surveillance, hence more authoritarian government, hence a deteriorating standard of living for all of us.

Proof: look at this:

@nzben How would other costs increase if we paid less tax (considering we then don't have the dead transactional cost of bureaucracy)?
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) June 18, 2013

@nzben If US medicare was a country, it's the 8th biggest economy in the world. That's not privatised health. 'Bulk discount': where from?
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) June 18, 2013

Of course taxes increase costs: they are a cost to business so increase product and service cost, as I've also written on before:

Bernard Hickey wanting a higher cost of living for consumers.

Labour’s David Clark wanting higher cost of living for consumers.

The ‘discount’ this Tweeter talks of is of course redistribution: taxpayers, such as myself incur much higher costs through taxation, and worse, the loss of our liberty and right to be left alone, so that those, many making and benefiting from imprudent decision-making, get the discount, in a system where the dead weight of bureaucracy adds huge transaction cost, and more importantly, skews coordination in an economy so like all planned economies, ultimately, it fails. We all lose in this.

Finally, talking of the surveillance state, next post will be Judith Collins’s – and in so many ways I love Judith Collins, but Judith, you have this dreadful authoritarian tendency – Anti-Money Laundering and Countering of Terrorism Act, in which further surveillance, further costs, and of course, onerous penalties, are laid on individuals just for wanting to move their money around – because it’s always about the money for big spending government. And this right down to financial institutions will have to report to police and FMA all transfers out of the country from just $1,000 up – Christ, Mrs H and I can drink that in a fortnight.