Chris Trotter’s Everyone Contradiction

I was surprised to find I agreed with the central tenet of Chris Trotter’s Press op-ed today. On listening to a radio news item with his daughter, about how ‘everyone’ agreed we couldn’t afford superannuation on its current path, he told her, wisely, ‘Whenever you hear a news bulletin like that, you should ask yourself who this ‘Everyone’ is’.

I would only ask Mr Trotter, when writing his every other op-ed, to himself consider who this ‘everyone’ is, when he demands that everyone be taxed to finance his violent, slave-based,  society, because I don’t buy into it, and know of lots of others who don’t either, but our hands are forced behind our backs while our pockets are picked by his tyranny of everyone, and we don’t get the choice of living our lives in freedom from them, or him. While I don’t know who everyone is, I do know Mr Trotter’s social democracy based on need, makes me everyone’s slave.

And for the record, no, we can’t afford superannuation as it currently is; private provision is the only answer, and the only answer, ironically, for everyone.

Brother's Keeper = Brothers' Slave

It’s simple economic and moral mathematics.

The welfare states, setting out with the best of intentions, started from the Christian premise of being my brother’s keeper, which has since been converted to the most vicious of secular religions by the Left, instituting the State in the place of God, and put into bloody practice by a whole list of tyrants from Stalin, on. Ignoring, however, for the moment, that assault rifle standing in the room of our social democracies  – last seen at the Dotcom mansion – and the fact that the welfare states were always going to be an economic impossibility, which is incontrovertible, proven by the current collapse of the West under a hubris of Keynesian debt,  or rather, the fact that politicians could never fund the welfare states from taxation alone, but had to use debt, and worse, debt to finance an enterprise that destroyed wealth, did not create it, thus was doomed to bankruptcy  … ignoring this, as our politicians have unfortunately done, my argument against our current social democracies is a moral one: our social democracies, based on forced redistribution (theft) are immoral from the foundation up. Or, I put it like this:

I am forced to be my brother’s keeper, except, we’re not talking about my brother: I wouldn’t need a brute state standing over me forcing natural love and affection for an actual sibling. In this instance, my brother is a total stranger: I have no natural love and affection for him, I have no say over his actions, I am not able to give him brotherly advice – such as, why are you and Mrs Brother having a sixth child when you have no job – and yet, if I do not allow the state to take my money to keep him, finance his sometimes stupid decisions, I am the one who will certainly lose my livelihood, and possibly my freedom, at the cold compassionless hands of the bureaucracy. So, given this, I have to conclude I’m not so much my brother’s keeper, as my brothers’ slave. And this is not so much the civilised society where natural love and affection is actually natural love and affection, as this is a Gulag where my liberty has been slowly starved of love.

And I write this little post over my breakfast cornies, looking at an IRD letter in front of me from a ‘Community Compliance Officer’, read Nanny Disciplinarian, who has just charged a taxpayer over $4,000 interest for an honest mistake they made, and for which we filed a voluntary disclosure, as soon as it was discovered. It’s the very last bill that taxpayer needs, and it's not community minded: the opposite. Still, I guess if they don’t survive it, they can go on welfare, and be kept by their brothers. …

... Community Compliance Officer ... Jesus. Oh no, that's where this whole mess started.