That Ought To Be a Personal Option
The most important thing Americans should be doing with their taxes should be to pay for things that have to do with domestic American issues. There are so many of those of course. We could go on forever just trying to decide which of those should be of utmost importance. There are even debates at home as to whether or not we should even be paying taxes at all. Whatever the case, most Americans can agree that those tax dollars must go towards helping America first, those that put other countries ahead of America, may very well have mixed loyalties.
After all, this nation's government exists to serve the people of this nation alone. If there are those outside our nation that are truly in need, then we should certainly help them, as we did in WWI and WWII. At that time there were nations being overwhelmed by forces hell-bent on dominating their way of life, culture and right to live free from oppression, tyranny, terrorism and apartheid-like oppression. We went to fight and help people that were under attack, and did a good thing in the process. And it was in our interests to keep the scourge in each instance from spreading. We as a free nation had to remain so.
Yet, after WWII we began building bases around the world to help rebuild nations, to help contain former threats and make sure they did not begin their campaigns of terror and apartheid-like oppression again. The apartheid, the terror; the terror, the apartheid; and on it went. We had to do all we could to prevent it from happening a third time.
As we were helping rebuild, a new threat arose in communist Russia. We set about to contain them by spreading our influence, they set about spreading their influence to fill the power vacuum in Europe and to make communism the dominant political philosophical principle on which governments around the globe based how they would approach governing their respective nations. It was our belief communism was a threat to our way of life for numerous reasons, not the least of which was the fact that it hindered the rights of the individual.
We ended our long standoff with communist Russia around 1989 and what was known as the Cold War between our nations was over. There we truly found indeed cause to celebrate. We could finally begin to bring all the tax dollars being spent to play power games with the USSR home again. We could put those dollars to use domestically as needed and decreed by Congress, and of course we could begin to put more savings back in taxpayer coffers, right?
The Cold War was over and the biggest threat the US had ever known no longer a threat. Americans had been pumping dollars into these gigantic bloated overseas military bases. Whole industries had begun to crop up around the US bases in the nations they were located in. This meant our tax dollars were now funding not just the essentials to keep the base going, but lavish spending in many cases and supporting these foreign industries.
We were putting money into huge lavish golf courses. In places across the globe we had built military golf courses (yes golf courses) so lavish, that the annual maintenance fees alone cost over a million dollars US. How is that good for American taxpayers? How does that help defend against all threats domestic and abroad? Were they supposed to be afraid of our mighty handicap? Rambo Mickelson? Jean Claude Van Jones? Arnold "The Terminator" Palmer?
We don't need to be sending money to these places, as President Obama has proven, the War on Terror requires drone strikes and small elite special forces teams, not large bloated bases and wasteful spending. Among the many things we support by sending all these wasted dollars overseas is the trade in human flesh. That's right, prostitutes, most of which are slaves, are big business around US military bases. In fact, the problem has gotten so out of control, in October of 2005 President George W. Bush, issued Executive Order 13387 declaring a zero tolerance policy. Yet, the problem persists and hardly a thing is being done to address the problem, as military records I requested myself clearly indicate. (http://www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com/militaryprostitution.html) He had to add to the laws already in existence and hardly an arrest whatsoever.
That means your money's still going to overseas hookers. Shouldn't that money be in your pocket instead of supporting slave labor for sex? Kidnapping little girls and boys and pimping them to US servicemen, is that how our tax dollars should be spent? That money should be in your bank account, used to pay down your mortgage, used to pay down your car loan, used to pay your kid's college bills used to save for your retirement or whatever you choose to do with it. It's your dough.
If perverts want to travel to nations where slavery is allowed and have sex with those slaves why is that something you should support? That's the only thing in this article that must never be any kind of option whatsoever. If molesters wish to go to those places to pay to rape an enslaved child, why should we support it? Is that why we go to church, the synagogue, the mosque, the temple or wherever we go to pray to be the sorts of people that contribute to that? Enough!
The only people that benefit from those large bases are foreign contractors servicing them, the industries that pop up around the bases, private defense corporations, private oil companies, private mining concerns, etc. But the majority of us hate the idea of slavery, especially the slavery of children, and we don't want to support that in any way monetarily or otherwise. That isn't about being high and mighty, that's just about not being a disgusting pervert. If some molester named Scott wants to do that, why should our tax dollars support it? It is the only thing that should not be an option in any way, yet we are forced to pay good hard earned taxes towards it!
We also don't want to pay taxes to support wealthy corporations. If there are those of us that do feel we want to contribute extra money to petroleum companies, they can set up a non-profit and go for it. Why rope the rest of us into having to pay for that? Want to donate to a wealthy billion dollar defense corporation because you feel sorry for them, set up a non-profit and go for it. Take up a collection, but why should all of us have to pay to make them even wealthier than they already are? Why? Why in a free country with an economy based on free market principles would we do that, instead of putting it towards things America needs, or just back into our pockets if we've taken care of those things?
It's the same with supporting nations that are warring with others that don't need our support, are abusing our charity and are causing more problems than they are worth. In other words where the investment just isn't paying dividends anymore, and rather is hurting us. Time to look at something else. An example is our funding the endless cycles of terrorism, apartheid, destabilization, intrigue, cheating and essentially welfare to both sides we engage in and support when sending foreign aid to Israel and Palestine.
Helping them is hurting us. That goes for both of them. They have proven to be untrustworthy and often liars the both of them as nations. They have not proven grateful for our help, only happy to use our generosity to negative destructive ends in their war to kill each other off. They are a poor investment. Supporting both sides is not in the interests of the majority of Americans. We could be paying down our mortgages, improving domestic roads and bridges and improving our shoddy school systems with that dough. They're a losing bet, just like the bloated foreign bases, supporting them is a thing of a bygone time, a thing of the past. Give them the cheap golden watches of goodbye as a symbol of their retirement from our kindness. We can still be pals, no hard feelings, but they must deal with their own issues. We had to deal with ours.
There are small percentages of the American population that want to send money and aid to them. That's fine, but as with supporting wealthy oil companies and wealthy defense companies, they can set up their own non-profits and start a collection. Why should the rest of us have to pay for that - be forced to pay for that? Where's the argument? Where there are people within American borders that need that help, they should get it, and we need it now more than ever. Do you feel wealthier or do you feel like you could use that cash in your pockets? Is it time to rethink our shipping pallets of disappearing cash overseas? Weren't you upset when you found out about that in Iraq and Afghanistan? Same thing. Let's be smart, and end it.
To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.