It seems there is no longer any attempt to maintain anything. It’s all being allowed to fall apart. The thinking appears to be highly short-term. There used to be consideration for both the short and the long term. Instead, there is this sense that everyone is trying to butcher the cash cow and get their share of the meat before it’s gone. There is the sense that people are trying to wring all the blood out of the middle class. But wringing the middle class out of its discretionary income through inflation and higher interest rates has long-term repercussions and I doubt the rich and the economists are too stupid to realize this. For example, what will the banks be left with if people can no longer afford to maintain their homes? A surefire way to ruin a house is to allow the roof to deteriorate. What will happen when the middle class can no longer afford to buy the goods from small businesses — the major, still existing employer of American citizens? Can they really not realize the domino effect that will ensue if they rid us of all our money? Or, is it they believe we are transitioning away from the economic paradigm we had all grown up with, and it will soon be replaced by one with extreme wealth coupled with extreme poverty? Where the majority work for no more than room and board — if we’re fortunate enough to afford even that much?
We need to have representatives that represent the people, not just bureaucrats that push forward their own agendas — constantly forcing the citizenry to engage in behavior against their free will by stacking these bureaucracies with fellow ideologues. They even prevent “We the People” from making even the barest of decisions on our own or from substantially influencing public policy. The laws enforced are about social control, not public safety. It’s become a system of favoritism, not of equal treatment. And yet, even the favorites can’t rely on being treated well from one moment to the next.
I remember when illegal migrants were being put up in fancy hotels. Apparently, those days are over. Sanctuary cities throughout the country are now evicting migrants from shelters after a set period of time. In a way, it makes sense. There should be an acknowledgement that this unrestricted migration can’t be sustained and that a city can’t afford to house a limitless homeless population. But because this is illegal immigration not legal immigration the structure and resources are just not there to smoothly transition people into an independent life. Once these people are evicted, what will happen to them? And once new people come in and find no support, what will happen to them? In other words, there isn’t enough condemnation of the open border policy itself coming from these sanctuary cities. You can’t simply kick people out on the streets and expect them to manage. How exactly do they think they’re going to get back to the border? Back to their countries of origin? And that’s assuming their countries of origin will take them back. Are the migrants even going to be allowed to cross back into Mexico and Canada? I’m not even sure the sanctuary cities want them to leave the United States, but they just don’t want to deal with the ones who aren’t fortunate enough to get adequate jobs and housing themselves. Their attitude appears to be to let someone else bear the cost; have other states and cities’ societal structures torn apart by the lack of preparation and the lack of structure you get from illegal immigration.
Meanwhile, it isn’t as though these migrants have been being treated well since the fancy hotel days. No, I don’t like the sense of entitlement I’ve seen. To my knowledge we’ve never had an immigration period where people came expecting to be taken care of. They used to want the opportunity for a better life, not to have that better life handed to them on the back of the people already living in the country. And still, it isn’t just the citizens of the United States who are suffering here; it’s also the migrants themselves. This is one of the most cynical, disrespectful things I’ve seen done in the name of humanity — encouraging people through demonstrations and promises of reward to debase themselves in order to come here. Where is the sanitation? And how are these people supposed to afford our inflated cost of living by taking on unskilled jobs when at least one of the reasons they were brought here was to drive down wages?
And the woke people who once upon a time, when they claimed to want the migrants in their cities, tried to feed us the line that these were refugees awaiting an answer to asylum requests. But I don’t see a refugee camp or even a recognizable crisis aside from the chaos created by the sheer number of homeless people they compelled to come here. No, these “refugees” are now being treated like intruders, not victims of a crisis. And they are being treated that way by the same people who encouraged them to come in the first place.
Still, this problem won’t be resolved by shoving people out onto the streets. We need to re-establish legal immigration. People need to be vetted before they are allowed to live here. And the free hotel stays and such to entice people to come here need to stop.
And we need to stop electing people who take all of our power of governance away from us, refuse to represent us, and then refuse to take responsibility for the fallout of their decisions.
The article, “Inflation is slowing. Here’s why prices still aren’t going down” by Charlotte Morabito, is about inflation and seeks to answer why prices aren’t going down. The author makes the following points: “Historical data suggests a key factor in bringing down prices is a slowdown in consumer spending. Despite nearly half of Americans reporting they’re in a worse financial situation than five years ago, they’re still spending. Retail sales were up 2.1% year over year in the first quarter of 2024 and consumer spending jumped in February and March.” (Morabito, 2024) The article explains the difference between disinflation and deflation. Disinflation is when the rate of inflation growth is slowing down. Deflation is when the prices go down. “There’s an important difference between inflation increasing more slowly — a phenomenon called disinflation — and inflation reversing itself, which would lead to prices coming down. Economists call the latter deflation, which is typically associated with a shrinking economy and potential recessions.” (Morabito, 2024) So, the prices going downward is actually a bad thing? Good to know.
Apparently, they have a new term for those who have a problem with the higher prices: “money illusion.” ‘“This cycle is a concept called money illusion,” said Sabrina Romanoff, a clinical psychologist. “People with money illusion … don’t take into account the level of inflation in an economy,” she said. “So they wrongly believe that a dollar today is worth the same amount that it was the year prior.” ’ (Morabito, 2024)
Yes, it seems those of us who actually expected an improvement in their personal circumstances are suffering from some sort of mental syndrome. It reminds me of the term money dysmorphia in the Dickler article, which describes how some people don’t see how great they have it since they are too busy comparing themselves to others.
Now we are mentally questionable because we expected the higher interest rates to drive prices down.
Also of note in the article is the following: “Wage-increase data may also seem inconsistent with consumer experience. Wages have been rising since January 2022, but the pace of the increase has been slowing down and, on average, it is just keeping up with rising prices. An analysis from Bankrate estimates the gap between inflation and wages won’t fully close until the fourth quarter of 2024.” Once again we’re supposed to believe that it’s the rate of increase that matters, not the cumulative inflation increase in comparison to the current wage.
The fact is the article reinforces the theory that domestic demand is responsible for the inflation. Both the article and the prevailing theory coming from the woke media seem to ignore global demand, such as from China, for our resources; cuts in supply for things like food, energy, and housing; as well as the printing of money coupled with excessive spending by the federal government. Unless these issues are addressed, how can the inflation be resolved? Instead, the article’s author is content blaming the consumer for continuing to spend. What are they supposed to do, not eat? Not pay their rent?
Their utilities? Where does this attitude we’re buying luxury (unnecessary) items come from? And what are we supposed to do, hope that people tap out of their credit and can’t pay their bills, so they’ll stop spending money? The implication from the article seems to be that that’s the only way we’ll see a reduction in prices. And one might conclude it’s the only way they’ll lower the interest rates on credit cards as well.
One of the fallouts from people’s discretionary income being taken away from them due to inflation is that things regular people used to do to support society through charity and responsible pet ownership also goes away. Back in the time of Henry VIII, Henry VIII declared himself the head of the church then raided the monasteries. The monasteries supported the poor; Henry VIII and elites who profited from the money seized did not.
It seems every time the government volunteers to replace the philanthropy of the people and do the job itself, it fails. They don’t want to use the money for the people it was allocated for — they want to use it on themselves and for their own agendas. Very quickly it becomes their money. The intended recipients become a burden they can’t afford to support. Soon, like a corrupt person who takes money in the form of a loan from a third party, they begin to think if that person weren’t around they wouldn’t need to repay. You can see that in healthcare and in Social Security. In health care, there are the POST (POLST) and MOST (MOLST) forms in most states all over the country, which encourage the chronically ill or those not anticipated to live past a set period of time to forgo things like antibiotics, food, and water. For example, New York’s MOLST form states, “This Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form is generally for patients with advanced illness who require long-term care services
and/or who might die within 1-2 years.* The MOLST may also be used for individuals who wish to avoid and/or receive specific life-sustaining treatments.”
Criteria differs per state. Many require some sort of signature from the patient, even if it’s just an e-signature. Some states like Alaska and Tennessee only require the physician (or in some cases certain other health care professionals) to sign the form. In Tennessee, the criteria for signing away a patient’s life by a health care professional is that the professional wouldn’t be surprised if the patient died within a set period of time. The Tennessee POST form reads: “POST is not for everyone, but is designed for seriously ill or frail patients who wish to limit treatment in some way. To determine whether a POST should be considered, clinicians should ask themselves: “Would I be surprised if this patient died or lost decision-making capacity in the next year”? If the answer is, “No I would not be surprised,” then a goals-of-care discussion and advance care planning with POST is appropriate to consider. Each treatment on the form should be evaluated and discussed based on what, if any, benefit it has for the patient.”
Some of the forms, even those that insist on a patient’s signature, nevertheless allow the frail or the chronically ill to opt for euthanasia on the basis that basically their lives are just not worth living. Needless to say, I expect pressure is applied to these people to opt for death. It really was a macabre experience when I stumbled across this information. These forms managed to make it through state legislatures through most of the states in the county without my being aware of them. I personally would never want to live in a state where the patient’s signature is not required. But I’m dubious of e-signatures as well. If a signature doesn’t have to be witnessed and/or can’t be verified then what good is it?
The Tennessee form includes the following:
“The POST form is not intended to replace an advance directive, but can be used for seriously ill patients, even if they do not have an advance directive. It is recommended that patients with a life-limiting illness have two (2) documents: Advance directive that includes appointment of a health care agent (also called a power of attorney for health care (3) and scenario-based treatment directives POST (Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment)”
Notice the words are intended and recommended not required.
Tennessee POST form reads: “The POST from may be prepared by any health care professional. To be valid, the form
must be signed by a physician, or at discharge from a hospital or long term care facility by a nurse practitioner (NP), clinical nurse specialist (CNS), or physician assistant (PA). Verbal orders are acceptable with follow-up signature by the physician in accordance with facility/community policy. The preparer should fill out the health care professional information on the front of the form. The professional who signs the POST form is assuming full responsibility for the medical orders and attests that these orders are an accurate reflection of the patient’s current treatment preferences.”
Tennessee POST form reads: “Patient or Surrogate Signature
Tennessee is one of a few states that does not require the patient or surrogate to sign the POST form. However providers are strongly encouraged to have the patient or surrogate, as appropriate, sign it, due to increasing concerns about Tennessee POST forms not being honored in states requiring patient signatures.”
“Health care facilities are also required to honor specific orders contained in the POST. The POST form itself can serve as the order set, or new orders consistent with those on the POST form can be written, per facility policy.
Specifically for first responders, the Board for Licensing Health Care Facilities has defined the Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT) and Para-Medic Scope of Practice so that Tennessee-certified First Responder or EMT are required to comply with POST forms appropriately executed if signed on discharge from a hospital or long term care facility (by a physician, nurse practitioner, clinical nurse specialist, or physician assistant).”
You can read more about the Tennessee POLST form here:
Meanwhile, people are abandoning their dogs in dog parks. And the number of strays is increasing. The shelter system is overwhelmed. People increasingly can’t afford their own pets, can’t afford to adopt pets, and I suspect can’t afford to fix their pets. Eventually, they will begin rounding up these cats and dogs and putting them to death — if they haven’t already. Death is the solution that is their ultimate answer to everything. Let the problem get so bad that the public just wants the problem to go away. Then, they introduce death as the solution. Increasingly, it’s becoming a solution people are willing to live with.
Just like the Weimar Republic allowed itself to be browbeaten into submission by the radical left and eventually annihilated by the radical right in the 1930s, our US government’s moderates are at risk of going the way of the dinosaurs. Moderates on both the right and the left are caving to the will of bullying extremists on both sides of the aisle, despite the fact that the moderates are in fact a majority in the legislature as well as the majority in the general population.
In our current time, these radical fringe groups, both left and right, are in agreement on one thing. They want to weaken and then destroy the existing moderate representational government and replace it with an authoritarian one, which will exercise total control over the population. Once the existing representational government is destroyed, then they will battle it out for which, left or right, will be the flavor of the day for authoritarianism. David Winner states in the subtitle of his article, “How the left enabled fascism” that “Ernst Thälmann, leader of Germany’s radical left in the last years of the Weimar Republic, thought the centre left was a greater danger than the right. We should remember his miscalculation.” (Winner, 2021) Just like the left in the Weimar Republic, radicals on both sides would rather see an authoritarian government of some kind than a moderate representational government that represents the people. “For strategic reasons, however, he was willing to help them achieve a key part of their dream, which he shared. The dream was to break the loathsome old liberal order. Such a break, reasoned the leader, would create conditions under which the left would sweep to power and transform the country for the better.” (Winner, 2021) Yet, both sides in the US seem to take for granted that they will come out on top of any power struggle. “Thälmann and the KPD regarded fascists and Nazis as products and tools of capitalism. Since social democrats were also capitalists, it followed that social democracy, fascism and Nazism were simply different facets of the same oppression. To further the dream of a Soviet Germany, the party was willing to help the Nazis destroy democracy, thinking it could beat the Nazis easily in the aftermath.” (Winner, 2021)
Clearly both sides are invested in seeing that the general population doesn’t have a voice or a say in their own lives. Our will is to be replaced by their will. We will be forced to listen to and obey a third party if they have their way.
What the people behind the woke movement have been pushing isn’t democracy as it was understood in the US — which is a representational government based on principle — but rather mob rule. The thought is that you eke your way into power and then you can overthrow any representational government and replace it with an authoritarian one that caters to the woke ideology.
The woke are responsible for starting this latest push toward authoritarianism. Part of their ideology is the belief that they are justified in forcing their social ideology on every living person. Only they believed that they would be able to seal the deal and consolidate their power by now. But for whatever reason, it hasn’t happened. Now it finally occurs to them that power could be given back to those who they trespassed against, and they are panic-stricken as a result. Meanwhile, those they have been open to persecuting the last three years are considering going authoritarian themselves and rule over their enemies the way the woke have tried to do these past three years to them. Some members of both groups have become convinced that their survival is at stake, and the only way to save themselves is to “win.” That is what the propaganda is pushing. As in the Weimar Republic, “In the 1930s, fear of Bolshevism persuaded many middle-class Germans to support Hitler (and led the Catholic Church to throw in its lot with fascism in Italy, Spain and elsewhere).” (Winner, 2021)
If the government does go authoritarian, I’m not sure which faction will come out on top. But I know those who will win are the globalists, and those who will lose are the rest of us. For the globalists will have torn down the strongest representational government in the world and replaced it with an authoritarian tyranny that they will be in a unique position to control.
The problem is we can’t see beyond the false dichotomy that you have to choose between left or right authoritarianism or become a victim of the other side. But there’s always a third way. And that way is God. He’s the One who can empower people to stand up to this mess and restore our ability to exercise our own free will again. And the only way to reconcile with God is through repentance, following His will and His standards, and through accepting the sacrifice of His Messiah Jesus Christ.
jenniferalicechandler 