Monday, September 26, 2011

A not so happy new year?

With the new year only days away, there seems to be little to celebrate and plenty to worry about. Indefensible Israeli borders forced on us by the UN? An oil embargo when America vetoes the new division of the holy land? A currency collapse when Russia and China decide to drop US dollars as the world reserve currency? A US govt shutdown as bipartisanship tears the fabric of this country apart? (Though it's awfully tempting let it shut Congress down and keep it that way, isn't it? Bunch of slimeballs!)

Still, there are things that the government needs to do, because for-profit companies simply won't do them. It is precisely because they are not "profitable" in the capitali$tic sense, but are profitable to society, that government must impose laws on corporations to protect people from being exploited (and the earth, too) and to provide for the needs of society that should be done in a non-profit manner - and need to be done even if the cost exceeds the revenue.

For example, what will we do when there's no US govt post office? How will the poor (who can't afford internet bill-paying and can't afford gas or time off work to visit everywhere in person) get by? Do the Republicans even care? Jim Kunstler made these comments today:

...Speaking of the constitution, I'm getting a little sick of these corporate CEO knuckleheads who come on CNBC and complain that the US Postal Service is running at a loss, and therefore we should abolish it. There is actually little beyond all those post offices that holds the fabric of small town America together anymore. And anyway, delivering the mail is one of the few actual government services that is spelled out in the US constitution in no uncertain terms in Article One, Section 8. It doesn't say the postal service must run at a profit, by the way. ...Neither does the war in Afghanistan (if you don't count the drug money). Congress runs at a profit, but not in any way that the constitution provides for. Before long, a lot of people are going to want to abolish it.

I don't think even the opium profits are putting a dent in the costs of the war, much less the costs to the ordinary people as Congress continues to serve their real lords & masters and gleefully leaves the average US citizen out on the street, homeless, exploited, and left with no retirement or healthcare.

In case you hadn't heard, the Republicans are just fine with that. Some teapartiers actually cheered at the thought of the elderly and poor dying off. With Christians like these set to run the country, we should worry. If they're willing to let their fellow co-religionists rot in shantytowns and die in the street, I don't think they're going to worry much if Jews do.

Especially since, you know, we secretly control all the world's wealth and we're conspiring with the "new world order" atheists to take over all their banks and steal all their gold - and brand them with microchips called "the mark of the beast" so they can't work, buy or sell unless they're part of our evil economic system.

Yes, a great many teapartiers and republicans really think that. And there's little doubt they intend to have control of the US government, one way or another. What joy!

Not that making aliyah looks to be a better option - the probability is high that Jerusalem will end up in a bloodbath, neighborhood against neighborhood, Muslims, Christians, and Jews - and it's questionable which side some of the chereidi are really on, to boot. A four way free-for-all? Kill them all and let God sort them out? International peacekeepers, anyone? Throw in a little biological or chemical warfare for good measure (they won't use nukes because we'd toast Mecca if they did, I presume). M-A-D!

Oy.

Or is that "ouch?" Duck and cover! And L'Shana Tova!

No comments: