Free market economists. You have hardly anything to sweat in this section of history. The only blips in the improvement of life have been in the free market. Technology is leaving generations of people behind.

It is not required for us to defend the dollar because it did not derive from the market.
It is not required for us to defend the Education system because it derived from the ancient Prussian model, mostlyGermany.
In fact, I am mad at the socialists because the traffic in Springfield is getting crazy.

We are also shooting ourselves in the foot by defending socialism from other socialists. When they say but you just want the economics of the 1920s back; or the 1950-60s back, or the 1990s. Deregulation and GREED! Just laugh.
Classical free markets was dead in practical application when the Union no longer was considered a compact, after the the Civil War.
Free market economics has grown far past Alex Smith and the Wealth of Nations. We have to start letting the people who have been advocating for more government understand that they are arguing against their own failed policy. I mean like Libertarianism hasn't  been winning for last 200 years lol

What is the sociological/economic/psychological consequences on Blue Collar wages created by the modern education system and their drive for college graduates?

Almost every student is persuaded repeatedly that college is the key to success and will earn them a million more dollars in their lifetime. Yes, a million is what the poster said in my classroom. This is an idea filtering throughout society, but specifically through the government education system.

If all the students are convinced including the majority who will not finish college continually that they will amount to nothing. Then the psychological attitude of this social class is artificially lower because of government propaganda.

They literally see themselves as less because they never finished college. Meaning they have less confidence to demand higher wages in the economy. If the majority of the workforce has this instilled in their minds by their government. We can start to see why wages are so one-sided. The elite continue to gain in this world while the lowers classes who need the most empowerment are undermined with their own tax dollars.

If you are not proud of your work... then why would you see yourself as an asset to society let alone attempt to ask for more money.

If we had a free market education system the love for work would flow freely from the minds of humans. The attitude that you MEAN something to the world would grow resulting higher wages.

My philosophy is a bottom up view of government; House->City->County->State->Federal. According to the description in a wonderful lecture on Libertyclassroom.com by Brion McClanahan in the Presentation "Virginia and the Cavaliers" and this philosophy entails an inside-out approach to politics. Your local government is supreme and you consent to any higher level government through self-government.

The next step is relieving the responsibility from government. By slowly drawing down the size and scope of government; as the private world absorbs this downsizing the real economy will thrive again.

Working for the government is a public service and should be a voluntary act. One of my first goals as Presiding commissioner is to cut my own salary if at all possible. Even if I can't cut it officially by the budget; I want to cut it figuratively. By continuing to live at modest means. I can start putting back the extra salary directly into the County operations. Maybe even hire a part time intern out of my paycheck; it would be good experience for them.

    I was surfing the web and came across an interesting article on Reason.com in which Scott Shackford helps put the "spending cuts" in perspective. The rest of the piece is just a relay for other some news releases on the subject of Paul Ryan's budget.

    The radio talk shows must have exploded when this proposal was officially announced. I can imagine the Conservatives rallying heavily behind these 5.1 Trillion dollar cuts, proposed by Paul Ryan. Of course, with any talk about cuts the Liberal media must have had a heart attack. Surely a few talking heads made claims that anyone who wants less government is heartless. However, in Scott's article he quotes the White House:

"Budgets are about choices and values.  House Republicans have chosen to           protect tax breaks for the wealthiest rather than create opportunities for middle         class families to get ahead.  The President believes that is the wrong                   approach and that we should instead be making smart investments necessary to create jobs, grow our economy, and expand opportunity, while still cutting the deficit in a balanced way and securing our nation’s future."

    What makes this information so ironic is the fact that these spending cuts are on future projected growths in spending. Meaning they are not even real cuts. I actually commend Paul Ryan for taking this big step and putting a plan forward. How deafening is it that we only hear of a few names on the main stream media from time to time. What about all the other representatives?

    The White house also has something right. We can see where these Republicans want to cut. The message is clear, and it is the same old message, that the old will continue to receive benefits they already spent gaining a 17 trillion dollar debt. While the younger generations get less access to education to expand productivity.

by
Benjamin T Brixey