<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<atom:link href="http://wobbleisland.com/rss/id_1/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<title>Latest Blogs</title>
		<link>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/</link>
		<description>Latest Blogs</description>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Because Everyone is Entitled to an "Equal" Education]]></title>
			<link>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/6/because-everyone-is-entitled-to-an-quot-equal-quot-education/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>&nbsp;<span style="color: #008000;">Received this recently via email. Many thanks to the original author.</span><br /><br />An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never fai</>...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&nbsp;<span style="color: #008000;">Received this recently via email. Many thanks to the original author.</span><br /><br />An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism would work, and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich &ndash; a great equalizer.</p><br /><p>The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan."</p><br /><div style="replaced: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;">All grades would be averaged, and everyone would receive the same grade &ndash; so no one would have to fail, but no one would be able to receive an A.<br /><br />After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.<br /><br />As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride, too, so they studied far less. The second test average was a D. No one was happy.<br /><br />When the 3rd test finally rolled around, the average was an F.<br /><br />As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased &ndash; but bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would agree to study for the benefit of anyone or everyone else.<br /><br /> All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor explained to them that socialism would also ultimately fail for exactly the same reason &ndash; because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when someone (government) takes the reward away, no one will try or care enough to strive to succeed.<br /><br /></span><span style="color: black;">Couldn't have said it any better.</span></span><strong><span style="color: black; font-size: 14pt;"><br /></span></strong></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<guid>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/6/because-everyone-is-entitled-to-an-quot-equal-quot-education/</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2011 20:31:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Chris Collins</dc:creator>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>A Real Threat to the Two-Party System?</title>
			<link>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/5/a-real-threat-to-the-two-party-system/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I discovered this website the other day - compliments of<a title="LewRockwell.com" href="http://lewrockwell.com" target="_blank"> LewRockwell.com</a>:</p><br /><p><a title="AmericansElect.org" href="http://www.americanselect.org/" target="_blank">americanselect.org</a></p><br /><p>This nationwide organization plans to nominate a candidat</>...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I discovered this website the other day - compliments of<a title="LewRockwell.com" href="http://lewrockwell.com" target="_blank"> LewRockwell.com</a>:</p><br /><p><a title="AmericansElect.org" href="http://www.americanselect.org/" target="_blank">americanselect.org</a></p><br /><p>This nationwide organization plans to nominate a candidate for the presidency in 2012 and have him/her on the ballot in all 50 states.</p><br /><p>A couple of interesting things come to mind here. First, this would be the first time that a primary was held without the affiliation of a political party. Second, any registered voter can be a delegate, and any citizen can be a candidate (according to the site's info). There will be no back-room agreements, no last minute suprises, and nationwide delegates get to define the issues.</p><br /><p>Why should this be disturbing to the Democrates and Republicans? Well for starters, any and all voters that feel disenfranchised by the current system may be participating. All of those "undecided" voters may be going bye-bye. Another scarey tidbit is that if enough voters become delegates and actually like the nominated candidate, there may be enough support to grab some electoral votes. This could be really entertaining!</p><br /><p>The question is, could AmericansElect.org do for the two-party system what the internet and mp3s did for the record industry?</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<guid>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/5/a-real-threat-to-the-two-party-system/</guid>
			<pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:47:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Chris Collins</dc:creator>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>A Social Security History Lesson</title>
			<link>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/4/a-social-security-history-lesson/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><strong><em>This was shared with me the other day. I thought it was a good example of the perversion of best intentions.</em></strong></p><br /><p><em>Social Security Cards up until the 1980s </p>...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><em>This was shared with me the other day. I thought it was a good example of the perversion of best intentions.</em></strong></p><br /><p><em>Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and Card were not to be used for identification purposes.</em><br /><em>Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the Message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.</em> <br /><br />Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:</p><br /><ol><li>That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary, <em>no longer voluntary</em>.</li><li>That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,<em> now 7.65% </em><br /><em> on the first $90,000.</em></li><li>That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,<em> no longer tax deductible.</em></li><li>That the money was put into an independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security retirement Program, and no other government program, <em>under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and spent.</em></li><li>That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income, <em>under Clinton &amp; Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed</em>.</li><br /></ol><br /><p>Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it? <br /><em>A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.</em> <br /><br />Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding? <br /><em>A: The Democratic Party.</em><br /><br />Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities? <br /><em>A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US</em>.<br /><br />Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants? <br /><em>A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.</em></p><br /><p>This is a question I ask constantly...If this is what happened to Social Security, why would we trust a central planning authority with healthcare?</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<guid>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/4/a-social-security-history-lesson/</guid>
			<pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:12:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Chris Collins</dc:creator>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Three Human Constants of a Social System</title>
			<link>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/2/three-human-constants-of-a-social-system/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>No one can argue that the world seems a little out of sorts these days. We have resorted to demonstrations, grandstanding, finger pointing, and a host</>...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No one can argue that the world seems a little out of sorts these days. We have resorted to demonstrations, grandstanding, finger pointing, and a host of other ineffective tirades. Before we can fix the current state of America, Western Civilization, and the world, it may help to understand what got us here. Because without a clear understanding of how our faulty behavior/thinking contributes to this mess, we don't stand a chance in fixing it.</p><br /><p>There are basically three traits of modern human behavior that contribute to the current state of events. Number one is natural and the most desirable. Number two is less desirable but can be corrected. Number three is pure evil and will lead to our eventual undoing. In the above order, here are the traits:</p><br /><ol><li><strong>People Will Always Act in Their Own Self-Interest</strong> - This is a developed form of "self-preservation". It stems from the natural law of owning your body, thoughts, and actions. People earn a living to provide for themselves and their families. They educate themselves to increase their standard of living. And they augment their spirituality, as they choose, to develop a sense of morality and respect for the individual interests of others. There are no illusions here. Individuals acting in their own self-interest respect the interests of others, and there are no rationalized short cuts.</li><li><strong>People Will Rationalize Behavior, Thoughts, and Actions to Achieve Their Interests</strong> - Rationalize means to <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">to</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">invent</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">plausible</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">explanations</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">for</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">acts,</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">opinions,</span> <span title="hwc">etc.,</span> <span title="hwc">that</span> <span title="hwc">are</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">actually</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">based</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">on</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">other</span> <span title="hwc" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">causes. People may not respect themselves or the interests of others, so they rationalize their reasoning to feel at-ease with their behavior. They act or believe a certain way and rationalize that everyone should adopt their reasoning (because we said so, it's the law, etc.) Sometimes, rationalizations will seek to diminish the interests of the individual (for the greater good). Nearly all rationalizations originate from an individual who believes that the self-interests of others should be sacrificed (and he deserves those sacrifices for one faulty reason or another) to enhance his own interests. <br /></span></li><li><strong>People Will Form Groups to Codify Their Collective Interests and Force Their Rationalizations on Others</strong> - People with common individual interests will form groups to codify those interests. This is the basis of an elected government. In this scenario, the government recognizes everyone's individual interests and protects those interests. It may not make laws that diminish the individual, favor itself over the individual, or favor sub-groups over the individual. Modern governments over time become corrupted with rationalized thinking to further the interests of government employees and their associates. This diminishes the role of individual and robs him of the tools necessary to protect his own interests. All arguments become based on the rationalized "National" or "Group" needs.</li><br /></ol><br /><p>We are&nbsp; currently witnessing governments operating from chronic rationalized behavior. They will over-emphasize (or create) a situation and legislate simply for the sake of legislating. They will rationalize impending doom as the basis to further dampen individual interests. They group individuals by race, gender, nationality, and religion and have them constantly at odds (or war) with each other. They then rationalize new laws for "everyone's security". Our current national (or world) dilemma is that populations of individuals have bought-in to this faultiy thinking - many actually agree with government action because they feel individually entitled or collectively superior.</p><br /><p>Our current global situation will not improve until all governments have the full consent of the people who employ them. And in turn, the people must respect the law of individual self-interest. We must understand that if left to their own devices, governments and the irrational people who run them will continue to run roughshod over the individual. And individuals are the key component of any great nation.</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<guid>http://wobbleisland.com/blog/2/three-human-constants-of-a-social-system/</guid>
			<pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2011 19:05:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Chris Collins</dc:creator>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
