Page 4 - Dinuba Sentinel 1-10-19 E-edition

Opinion
A4 | Thursday, Janauary 10,, 2019
In My Opinion
Government workers and Welfare, Wboth funded by taxpayers
ere you aware that seize their money there are now roughly for some idiotic 22,000,000 (22 million) scheme which is
Fred Hall
designed only to keep bureaucrats in office.
The greatest problem with any welfare state is predictably this; anything which is
Fred Hall - Publisher Rick Curiel - Editor
people who are working for the government? That’s about double the number of Americans employed inmanufacturing. Thisseemstobe excellent bit of information for one
to have when they are faced with the upcomingtaxseason. Howtroubling is it to know there are about half of us working in a constructive endeavor as there are in our success-impeding bureaucracy?
Does anyone reading this want to make a guess which state employs the greatest number of bureaucrats? That would be California with almost a million—883,404—to be exact. Reasonably one would expect that would represent a thoroughly solid block of almost a million Democrat voters and about a million souls with whom we are taxed for their generally large salaries. Government workers, as a general rule, are compensated well above the average private sector worker.
Add the burden of supporting—yes, you are their sole means of support because the government produces nothing—that many people to the huge number of people who receive welfare benefits—some of whom are not even citizens of this country and you realize the extent of the problem. DonaldTrumpandhisadministration, by creating a stronger economy, has managed to reduce the overwhelming numbers created under Barack Obama but it still is a huge capital outlay. We must begin to stem the steady slide of America into a welfare state.
I know it’s difficult to do when one is forced to pay so much money to support our government but perhaps one can find some solace in the fact that Trump was successful in lowering taxes on the private sector as one of his first acts in office. Democrats—
as a whole, politically—just seem to want ever more taxes to support their continued ”giveaway” programs. They continue to push free health care for everyone including illegals, free college tuitionandaguaranteedincomefor life. We can’t afford it but they don’t giveadamn! Onceagainyouwillbe expected to step up and span the void.
Bailing out the public sector pension plans will be your next “hit.”
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York has proposed a tax of 70 percent on the “wealthy” and Brad Sherman
of California has already filed articles of impeachment against the President for firing someone he should have fired immediately and was completely entitled to do. The surest cure for that sort of thinking would be for us, the voters, to stop electing ignorant people. It doesn’t require a lot of deep thinking to realize what a 70 percent tax rate would do to this economy and our jobs which support the entire mess that is government. This overwhelming envy of the successful is detrimental.
Does anyone truly believe that people who are truly wealthy with access to accountants and lawyers will voluntarily, subserviently sit idly by and allow a bunch of bureaucrats to
Guest Column
TA i m e t o g e t f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t o u t o f W a s h i n g t o n
acquired too easily is often taken too lightly or for granted. The hard work required by one citizen in providing a benefit—it’s actually a freebie because it certainly isn’t an entitlement—often elicits only a shrug by the recipient. There should be no doubt why California—which, along with New York and Massachusetts—has become the very epitome of welfare states. Here in California we’re now talking about providing healthcare for anyone in the world who can get here!
By becoming a welfare state, we
have become the ultimate magnet which draws far too many immigrants who have little interest in becoming American citizens. Their main criteria is the “milk and honey” being extracted from patriotic workers who believe
in what this country stands for, who are being extorted for this politically motivated undertaking. Take a look
at several members of this newly elected Congress who have no interest inAmericanculture. They,instead, showed up for work wearing the costumes of their native country. It looked more like the United Nations or the bar room scene from the Star Wars movie. Who are you going to respect; some foreign nation and their culture or the American people who elected you? At least act as if you are one of us.
The uncontrolled flow of immigration must be stemmed— immediately and by any means necessary. The entire screening process must be refined and greatest attention to those who contribute and are not be a burden to society— assimilate! Show us you want to be anAmerican. Wallshaveworked everywhere they’ve been tried in the past. Anyonewhotellsyouotherwise is lying.
We’veenteredanerainAmerica which glows brightly with promise
for all of its citizens but is on the cusp of being threatened by the growing hatred and rage which is being fanned by our media. No rational act or accomplishment was ever recorded while being perpetrated in the guidance of anger. Frankly, I don’t understand how members of our media and professional politics can be so irrationally steeped in hatred for one man. Give credit where credit is due. This man—Donald Trump—has accomplished more during a two year period than the last several Presidents and he has done so while dragging a litany of haters along with him kicking and screaming. That’s no small accomplishment!
But, as always, that’s only one man’s opinion.
Fred Hall is publisher of the Dinuba Sentinel.
In My Opinion
P Not too sure a wall is what we need
ardon the pun, but I’m kind of on the fence about So if the wall is about national the wall. security, who is the enemy there?
True, walls themselves serve a purpose. The best Terrorists and all those who come into
ones, history has shown, have been the ones that store up water for the sake of self-preservation.
Some walls have been built up to protect cities and empires from attacking forces, while others have been used in the most creative way – in the form of four connecting walls rather than one continuous.
Of all the walls ever created, however, the worst have been those built solely for the purpose of dividing a people. Times have certainly changed. Just three decades ago the
world watched as one of the greatest US Presidents, Ronald Reagan, told the leader of the Soviet Union (now Russia), “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”
President Reagan was of course referring to the Berlin Wall, a wall that divided East Germany from West Germany (now just Germany).
I was just a freshman in high school when I witnessed the Berlin Wall come down. Though I admit I didn’t know much about foreign politics, or the complete history of the German people or the wall in question, I came away with one everlasting impression. This wall was unwanted and the people cheered with victory upon its rubble.
What I did know of the Berlin Wall was that it stood as
a remnant of a troubling time in which the world was so divided it came to war. It was also the byproduct of perhaps one of the most polarizing figures in German, if not world history, Adolf Hitler.
Now, President Donald Trump wants to build a wall spanning the entire southern border between the United States and Mexico and I can’t help but wonder how this wall, built or not, might be remembered through the eyes of history.
Trump claims the wall is a matter of national security. I am all for national security. The world is a dangerous place and the 21st century has certainly shown us that there are people out in the world who maliciously want to cause us harm. In fact, we’ve been fighting them for decades because the threat remains.
This is perhaps the most troubling thing about the wall when it comes to the argument of national security. Since 9/11, after experiencing the most devastating attack on US soil, we as a country have moved forward only with our head on a swivel and the added security that our men and women in the armed forces are out doing the best work in the world to protect us – day in and day out.
But Trump wants to claim that the war against that enemy is over. After just two years in office, he has concluded we have been victorious in that fight, in spite of every expert in the war against terrorism virtually shouting at us, “NO! This is not the case!”
What about that national security? Have we really lost sight of that enemy? Why isn’t that more concerning?
Rick Curiel
this country with the intent to do ill should by all means be stopped. But the problem with stopping those people the wall intends to keep out, namely the drug cartel, human traffickers and violent gang members (all of which I’m sure all sides can agree need to dealt with) is that those people don’t care about walls.
Consider the most notorious drug cartel leader in recent history. Currently, the drug lord known as “El Chapo” sits in a maximum security cell somewhere in New York. But prior to being moved to his current location, El Chapo managed to escape prison, twice. One of the ways he used to escape was by tunnel.
Case in point, those who want to get past any barrier will do so. A wall will make no difference.
So when it comes to the wall being a matter of national security, the argument doesn’t hold water. Focus those efforts, rather, on combating the threat of terrorism
and create stiffer penalties on a federal level for illegal immigrants who commit crimes on US soil.
Building a wall does not curtail the problem for which it is intended – that is, it won’t keep people out. It’ll only slow them down. Most of the people who migrant to this country, legally or not, now and historically, do so with all good intention. Very few come in via an “invasion.”
Immigration needs to be reformed, without a doubt. But is a wall the first step in this reform?
Make illegal immigration a wall of its own. If people are taking advantage of the current system, change the current system. Here’s an idea: require proof of citizenship (e.g. birth certificate) for jobs and government benefits. Have stricter penalties for those who supply false social security cards. Allow federal officials to always have the means to deal with illegal immigrants who are deemed a threat to public safety. And when it comes to crimes committed by illegal immigrants, send the message, throw the biggest book at them. Let the system be the wall.
Most would agree, regardless of your political affiliation, that the country has not experienced this kind division since perhaps the Civil War. At the center of this divide, unfortunately, has been the rhetoric of our 45th president, Donald Trump.
Every man wants to leave a legacy. Trump will likely be remembered as a man who further divided this county. A stamp of that division on our southern border, I believe, will only be a stain on the landscape and legacy of this great country.
Rick Curiel is editor of the Dinuba Sentinel.
mericans of all political stripes distrust the federal create health care jobs in places often government. For years, the name of the nation’s abandoned by providers, boosting
capital has been used as shorthand for federal economies and bringing affordable care to
overreach and bloat. For most Americans, Washington, D.C. is hundreds of miles away — and a million ways disconnected — from them.
The Washington area is home to hundreds of thousands of federal jobs, and many unpopular agencies. But agencies that are more spread out, like the Postal Service, are significantly more popular.
So here’s a simple idea: Move more of the federal government to the rest of the country.
Studies show that once you get to know people different from you, your prejudice towards them drops. Could that same approach also bridge the deep disconnect between Americans and their national government?
One way to sweeten the pot would be the promise of tens of thousands of jobs to areas that need them.
A geographically diverse federal government would be bolstered by the Green New Deal program championed by progressives like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Bringing back past agencies, like the Depression-era Works Progress Administration, to help build green infrastructure would help transition this country off fossil fuels and into
a sustainable future. It would guarantee jobs, maybe good union jobs, for countless workers.
A new Works Progress Agency could establish offices in places like Milwaukee, where it could build a long-discussed high-speed rail line connecting the cities of the Midwest.
Or in Phoenix, where it could construct more solar power plants in the desert. It could set up in places like Jackson, Mississippi, helping to build sustainable co-op farms, or on the Gulf Coast, to fight climate change.
Similarly, a single-payer, Medicare for All health service would also need to have offices in communities. It would
Brian Wakamo
millions.
Meanwhile, reintroducing postal
banking would bolster Post Office finances and bring banking to millions of under- banked Americans.
There’s another benefit to all this: the revitalization of our heartland cities.
Midwestern cities like Detroit, Cleveland, and Milwaukee are full of classical architecture and cultural amenities, but have lost hundreds of thousands of jobs from the erosion of manufacturing. New federal jobs could reverse decades of decline in these grand cities.
Why stop there?
The National Weather Service could move to New Orleans or another area impacted by the climate change they study. The U.S. Geological Survey could move out to Sacramento, which knows something about earthquakes. Agencies that deal with farming and rural development could set up in Farm Belt areas like Kansas City, where they’d be more attuned to the people they serve.
Spreading out the federal government would help rebuild the trust that’s eroded in recent years and provide jobs that are unionized, well-paying, and accessible to people often excluded from the broader economy.
Decentralizing government is popular across the political spectrum, and the federal government is bogged down by its centralization in D.C. Why not put it more in line with its original mission — to be of the people, by the people — and bring it to the people that need it most?
Brian Wakamo is a research assistant at the Institute for Policy Studies. Distributed by OtherWords.org.
Join the discussion
The Dinuba Sentinel welcomes to editor@thedinubasentinel.com.
submissions of letters to the editor on topics of local relevance. Word limit is 350. Letters are considered once per month for each submitter.
Letters must include the author’s name, phone number and address for verification. Mail to 145 South L Street, Dinuba, CA, 93618, or e-mail
Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity.
Libelous letters will not be printed.
Guest columns will be considered for publication - E-mail editor@ thedinubasentinel.com. Word limit is 650.