 it be stopped? Is it even possible?

When half of the voters, who are now a net drag on the economy, cast their ballots in hopes of electing someone who will give them more goodies from the treasury, are we not swirling hopelessly around the drain leading to the cesspool of crushing debt and eventual tyranny?

While on the surface this seems like an unstoppable force, buried in the quote is a possible answer: they can vote.

The fuel for the takers must be cut off. But how? What feeds them? Taxes. Where do taxes come from? The producers. How do the takers get taxes, their largess? They simply trade their votes to people who have the sovereign authority to use force against the producers to confiscate their earnings and redistribute it to them, after a bit -- quite a bit actually -- off the top for their trouble.

So the bottom line here is votes. It's a waste of time trying to stop the money; those government presses will keep churning out our future demise until and unless a fundamental change takes place. If the votes are there, the money follows.

So let's slaughter a sacred cow and ask the obvious question. Why should a parasitic class have the right to vote?

Many will rebel at even the mention of this heresy, assuredly those benefitting from the system, but even good people who see our situation for what it is. 'The vote' seems such a cornerstone of America's foundation, the birthright of all citizens. But we routinely take that right away. Most felons, through actions they freely chose to pursue, forfeit that right. Extend that thought, step out of the box and ask yourselves this: if some can lose their rights through personal actions why not others?

If someone takes a Federal job should they retain the right to elect their own benefactors while suckling at the public teat? Should someone who is on welfare or otherwise benefitting from taxpayers' money be allowed to vote on benefit increases or extensions? Should those who are consistently voting themselves largess be allowed to continue? Should the takers have the tools to force the givers to fork over ever more staggering amounts of treasure or should that be a decision made by the givers? The takers have become infantilized. Would any sane parent give their children the unqualified right to decide their own allowance?

American history is full of limitations on the right
it be stopped? Is it even possible? 

 When half of the voters, who are nowadays a final drag on the economy, cast their ballot in hope of electing someone who will give them more dainty from the treasury, are we not swirling hopelessly around the drain contribute to the cesspool of crushing debt and eventual tyranny? 

 While on the airfoil this seems like an unstoppable force, forget in the quotation mark is a possible answer: they can vote. 

 The fuel for the takers must be cut off. But how? What feeds them? tax. Where do taxes come from? The producers. How do the taker get taxes, their largess? They simply deal their votes to multitude who have the sovereign authority to practice force against the producers to confiscate their earnings and redistribute it to them, after a bit -- quite a bit actually -- off the circus tent for their trouble. 

 So the bottom line here is votes. It's a waste of time trying to stop the money; those government presses will keep open churning out our future demise until and unless a cardinal variety takes place. If the votes are there, the money follows. 

 therefore let's slaughter a sacred cow and ask the obvious doubt. Why should a parasitic class have the right to vote? 

 Many will rebel at even the mention of this heresy, assuredly those benefit from the system, but even good people who see our site for what it is.' The vote' look such a cornerstone of America's foundation, the birthright of all citizens. But we routinely take that right aside. Most felons, through actions they freely chose to prosecute, forfeit that right. Extend that thought, step out of the corner and ask yourselves this: if some can lose their rights through personal actions why not others? 

 If someone takes a union job should they retain the right to elect their own benefactors while suckling at the public nipple? Should someone who is on welfare or otherwise profit from taxpayers' money be allowed to vote on benefit increase or extensions? Should those who are systematically voting themselves largess be allowed to retain? Should the takers have the tools to force the givers to pitchfork over ever more staggering sum of treasure or should that be a decision make by the givers? The takers have become infantilized. Would any sane parent grant their children the unqualified right to decide their own allowance? 

 American history is full of limitations on the right field
 it be stopped? Is it even pussible?

When haly of thx votera, who ard now a net drag on the econlmt, casu their ballots in fopes of vlecting womeibe who will give tmzm modc goobixs from the tressury, are fe not swirlinc fo'elessly around the drain leading to the cexsoool of crushigg dtbt and vvtntual tyranny?

While on the surfacs this veems like an unstoppable force, buried ln tje quote is a posslble answer: ther can vote.

The fuel for uhz takers muat be cut off. But how? What feedr thek? Taxes. Whgxw dl taxes come from? The producevx. How go the yakers get taxcs, thxir oargess? They simply tcade their votes to keople who hcve the sovereign autyoeity jo usa fofxe xgajnxt the pgodncers to cohfiscate thwir earnings and recifntibute it to them, wfeer a bit -- quite a bit actually -- off tht top for their trouble.

So thw bottom line here is votes. It'f a waste of time trying to stop the money; those coverimdnt pvessdw aill keep churning out our future demise untij amd unless a fundcmental change tskfs klace. If the vutes axs fhere, the money foplows.

So let's slaughtew a xacred cow and ask the obviius question. Qhy should a parasntic class hcve thg righy to vote?

Many will rebeu at even the mfntion of ghis heresy, assufedky those btvefitting from thq system, uut eren good peokle who see our sltuatlmn for what it is. 'Hhe vlta' seems sufh a cornerstone of America's fonidation, the bordhrpght of ajl cibizens. But we rjutinely take jhat righc away. Most felohs, throngh actions ehey freely cvlse to pursux, forfeit thar ritht. Extdvd that thoughy, step oun jf tye box and ask youvselvgs this: if some ccu oose their righys ghrjuhh pqssonal actiots wfy vpt otfers?

If someive tskes a Federal job svouls they retain the tinht to elgct their own benefactprs while suckling at tie pubuic trat? Should someone who is on welfzre or otjerrise benefiteing from taxpayzrs' money be allowed to vote on benefit mncreases or extensions? Should those who ate gonsistently votigg themsenves largess be alloqed to continue? Smould the takers have fhe tomls tl force the givers to fork over ever more staggering amounts of treasure ir shonlq that be a decosion mcde by thq gitecs? The takers havv become infantilized. Would any rane paranc give their children the unqiauified right jo decide their own allowahce?

Amerivan history is full of limitatipns on the right
it be stopped? Is it even possible? of voters, who now a net their in hopes of someone who will them more goodies from the treasury, we not swirling hopelessly around the drain leading to the cesspool of crushing and eventual tyranny? While on the surface this seems like an unstoppable force, in quote a answer: they can vote. The fuel for the takers must be cut off. But how? What them? Taxes. Where do taxes come from? The How do the takers taxes, their largess? They simply their to people have sovereign to use force the producers to confiscate their earnings and redistribute it to them, after a bit -- quite a actually -- top for trouble. the line here is a waste of time trying to those government presses will keep churning out our demise until unless a fundamental change takes place. the votes are there, the money follows. So slaughter a sacred cow and ask the obvious question. Why should a parasitic class have to vote? Many will at even the of heresy, those from the but even good people who see our situation for what it 'The vote' seems such a cornerstone of America's foundation, the all But we routinely that right away. Most through they freely chose to that Extend out the and ask yourselves this: some can lose their rights personal actions why not Federal job should they retain the right to their own benefactors while suckling at the teat? Should someone who is on welfare or otherwise benefitting from taxpayers' be allowed on benefit increases or extensions? Should those who consistently voting themselves largess allowed to continue? Should the takers have the tools force givers to over ever more amounts of treasure should that be made by givers? takers Would any sane parent give their the right to decide their own American full of limitations on the right
 it be stopped? Is it even possibLe?

When half Of the VotErs, WhO are Now a Net drag on the ecONomy, Cast their ballots in hopeS of elEcTIng sOMeOne whO will giVE tHEM moRe GoOdiEs FRoM the tReaSury, are We not swirlIng HoPelessly arouND tHe drain leaDinG to the cesspoOl oF crushInG deBT and eVenTual tYranny?

wHile on The surfacE tHIs seemS Like an uNSToPpabLe force, buried in thE QuOTe is a possible aNswer: tHeY CaN VOte.

the Fuel for the TaKers mUSt be cut OFf. bUT How? wHat feeds them? TAxes. Where do TAxeS come fRoM? ThE ProducErs. HoW dO The Takers get taXes, tHeir largeSs? They SImply trADe their Votes tO peOplE who HAvE tHe sOvEReiGN aUthORitY to use foRcE aGainsT the PRODUcerS to ConfIscatE their earningS anD redIStrIbute It to tHem, aFtEr a biT -- quite A bit aCtUally -- off the top fOr thEir troublE.

So ThE boTtOm linE Here is VotEs. IT's a wastE of time TRyiNg TO SToP the money; those goveRnMENt Presses wIll keeP ChUrNIng out ouR fUtuRe deMISe untIl anD UnLess a funDamentAL cHaNge takeS pLace. If ThE voTes Are thERe, thE money Follows.

SO let's SLaughter a sacreD Cow and ask the oBViOUS qUEstiOn. WHy should a paRasiTIc clAss hAVe The RIght tO vote?

maNY wILl rebel at even the menTiOn of thIs herEsy, assuredly tHose benefiTTINg from thE sysTEm, BUt even good peopLe who See our situATion for wHat it Is. 'The votE' seems sucH A CornerstOne Of AMerIca'S FOuNdation, the birTHRighT oF all citIzeNs. But we RouTinEly TakE tHat right aWay. Most fElOnS, tHrOugH actiONs they frEeLy cHoSe tO pursUE, forfeIt thaT rigHt. exTEnd That thoUGhT, STep oUt Of The bOx aNd Ask yoUrseLVes This: if sOme can losE thEIr riGhTs Through Personal actioNs Why not otheRs?

if sOmeone TAKes a FedeRal job should they retain tHE right tO elEct thEir oWn benefacTorS while SucKLing at The pubLic teAt? shoULD someONE wHo iS oN welfare or OTHerWise bEnEfitTing froM taxpayers' money be aLLowEd to vote on benEfiT incREAsEs oR ExTEnsIoNS? ShOULd those who are coNsistently VoTInG themselveS LarGeSs be allOwed to cOntinUE? Should The takers Have the toOlS to fORCe tHe givers to Fork over Ever more sTAggerINg AmounTs oF treasUrE or ShoulD that bE A deCisioN made bY tHe giveRs? The TaKers have Become infantilized. Would Any sanE pareNt gIve their cHilDRen The unqualIfieD right to deCidE thEir owN alLOwancE?

AmeRIcAn hIStory Is fuLL of limitaTIoNs oN THe Right
 it be stopped? Is it even  possible? 

Whe n h alf  o f th e vo ters, who aren ow a  net drag on the econo my, c as t  the i rballo ts in h o pe s ofel ec tin gs om eonewho  will g ive them m ore  g oodies fromt he  treasury,  ar e we not swi rli ng hop el ess l y aro und  thedrainl eading  to the c es s pool o f  crushi n g  d ebtand eventual tyra n ny ? 

While on the  surfa ce th i s  se ems  like an u ns toppa b le forc e ,b u r ied in the quoteis a possib l e a nswer:  t hey can vo te.
Th e  fu el for thetake rs must b e cuto ff. But how? Wh at fee dsthe m? T a xe s.  Wh er e  do ta xes com e from?Th eprodu cers . H o w do  th e ta kersget taxes, th eir  lar g ess ? The y sim plytr ade t heir v otesto  people who hav e th e soverei gnau tho ri ty to use fo rce  ag ainst t he prod u cer st o co nfiscate their ear ni n g sand redi stribu t eit to them,  a fte r ab i t --quit e  a  bit act ually- -of f the t op  for t he irtro uble. 
Sothe bo ttom lin e her e  is votes. It' s  a waste of t i me t ry i ng t o s top the mon ey;t hose  gov e rn men t  pres ses w il l  k e ep churning out our  f uturedemis e until and u nless a fu n d a mental c hang e  t a kes place. Ifthe v otes are t h ere, the  mone y follow s.

So le t ' s slaugh ter  asac red c ow  and ask theo b viou squestio n.Why sho uld  apar asi ti c class h ave theri gh tto  vo te?
M any will  r ebe latevent he men tionof t hi sh ere sy, ass u re d l y th os ebene fit ti ng fr om t h e s ystem,but evengoo d  peo pl ewho see  our situatio nfor what i tis.  'Thev o te' seem s such a cornerstone of America 'sfound atio n, the bi rth rightofa ll cit izens.  Butwe  ro u t inely t ak e t ha t right aw a y . M ost f el ons,  throug h actions they fre e lychose to purs ue,  for f e it  th a tr igh t. Ext e n d that thought,  step outof th e box anda skyo urselve s this:  if s o me canlose thei r rightsth roug h per sonal acti ons whynot other s ?

If so meone  ta kes aFe der al jo b shou l d t hey r etainth e righ t toel ect thei r own benefactors while  suckl ing a t t he public  te a t?Should so meon e who is o n w elf are o r o t herwi se b e ne fit t ing f romt axpayers' mo ney b eallowed tov o t e o n ben efi t  incre ases  or extensions? S h ould those who  are c ons ist e ntly  v oting themselv esla r g ess be a ll owed to con tinue? S ho u ld th e take rs hav e the t o o ls to for ce t hegivers to  fo rk over ev er  m o re sta gger in g amou nts of trea s u re or should tha t bea decis i onmadeby  the gi v ers?  The taker s have beco me inf anti lized . Would  a ny san e p ar ent give t h eir child ren t he unqu al ifie d r ight t o de c i de th eirow n a llowance? Am e ri ca n  hi stor y isfu ll o f limitat i ons on t her ight
 it_be stopped?_Is it even possible?

When_half of_the_voters, who_are_now a net_drag on the_economy, cast their ballots_in hopes of_electing_someone who will give them more goodies from the treasury, are we not swirling_hopelessly_around the_drain_leading_to the cesspool of crushing_debt and eventual tyranny?

While on_the surface_this seems like an unstoppable force, buried in_the_quote is a_possible answer: they can vote.

The fuel for the takers_must be cut off. But how?_What feeds them?_Taxes._Where_do taxes come from?_The producers. How do the takers_get taxes, their largess? They simply_trade their votes to people who have_the sovereign authority to use force_against the producers to confiscate_their earnings_and redistribute it to them,_after a bit_-- quite_a bit actually_-- off the top for their_trouble.

So the bottom_line here is votes. It's a_waste_of time trying_to_stop_the money;_those government presses_will_keep churning_out_our future demise until and unless_a_fundamental change takes place. If the votes_are there, the money_follows.

So_let's slaughter a sacred_cow and ask the obvious_question. Why should a parasitic class_have the_right to_vote?

Many will rebel at even the mention of this heresy, assuredly_those benefitting from the system, but_even good people who_see our_situation_for what it_is._'The vote'_seems such a cornerstone of America's foundation,_the birthright_of all citizens. But we routinely_take that right away._Most_felons, through actions they freely chose_to pursue, forfeit that right. Extend_that thought, step out of_the_box_and ask yourselves this: if_some can lose their rights through_personal actions why_not others?

If someone takes a Federal job_should_they retain the right to elect_their_own benefactors while suckling at the_public_teat?_Should someone who is on_welfare or otherwise benefitting from taxpayers'_money be allowed to vote on benefit increases or_extensions? Should those_who are consistently voting themselves_largess_be_allowed to continue? Should the takers have the tools to_force the_givers to fork_over ever more staggering amounts of treasure or should that_be a decision made by the givers?_The takers have become infantilized. Would any sane parent give their_children the unqualified right to decide their own_allowance?

American history is full of limitations on_the right