Governance vs. Social Engineering

“The Democratic Party is the party of the poor and the working class.”

Presidential Candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders

Flag We The PeopleDefinitions classify us but if they are true then we must live with the consequences.

You cannot turn on the radio or television during an election year without hearing a candidate of the Democratic Party telling you that if you are poor or working you should agree, accept, and endorse their policies, agendas, and ideologies.  As with many things, I don’t like to have anyone that I do not trust telling me what I should or shouldn’t believe.  It was the above quote that caused me to reflect on this mindset since my working status clumps me into their demographically aligned pool.

Years ago, when I first came of voting age, I was a young man raised in the South; I registered my allegiance to the Democratic Party only because it was the party of my parents and I knew very little about the differences between the two major political parties.  In those years it was easy to understand why the Democratic Party was the party to belong too, especially if you lived in the south.  With revered leaders like John F. Kennedy showing the way with an overall conservative nature while at the same time balancing an extreme empathetic understanding of the under privileged; what was not to agree with.  Oh but how things change!  It has recently been said that President Kennedy would have been a great Republican in today’s world.

As I grew older and learned more about the history of our various parties; I soon determined for myself that the Democratic Party “leadership’s” ideals, values, and beliefs were drifting further and further away from the conservative basis of our Country’s governmental foundation, our Constitution.  In the past two decades, their “leadership” has been comprised of people I personally could never respect, trust, or admire; at least not with a good conscience.  I know that they are not perfect, nor are the leaders from the other parties, and certainly neither am I.  However, in my opinion, the large majority of politicians show little moral or ethical principles in their work or personal lives while at the same time they “pandered” to the less fortunate, “buying” their votes by “peddling” an ever growing array of government sponsored entitlements paid for by the hard earned tax dollars of the very people whom they are elected to serve. Yes, that’s right; they are elected to serve everyone not just those who voted for them.

Speaking as a non-politician and a businessman, it seems that for the last twenty years the Democratic Party, more so than the Republican or Libertarian Parties has contrived a plan that contradicts the rules of governance.  Their plan in business terms goes like this.

The Board of Directors (Politicians) creates a business (Government Services) whereby their service is the only one in town and everyone has to buy from them. (Income Taxes)  When they first opened for business every customer paid for the service and the board members were volunteers for a one year period. Over time some of the board members decided they liked the perks of their board position; wishing to extend their position as a paid business they decide to give some of the voting customers the service for free. (The low income citizens paid no taxes)  This idea worked and the voting members (citizens) who benefited from the free service voted for the board members (politicians) to stay on the board.  To cover the cost of the free service and the new expenses of the board members, the board had to raise the cost on the paying customers but that was not a huge problem since they had to pay any way because it was the only service in town.  As time passed, more and more of the board members wanted to stay on the board so they had to work together to expand the free services.  They soon realized that if a little more than half of the voting customers perceived that they were getting something for nothing from certain board members they could be guaranteed the votes needed to get whatever they wanted.  Their ultimate goal is to have 60% of their customer base (voting population) getting the service for free.  The 40% that pay for the service will be required to pay enough to cover 100% of the total cost and they will not have the majority vote needed to change the rules.

This business plan does two things, first it locks more of those customers to that company because they are getting something for nothing.  The customers will also be open to giving them more business in the hopes of getting the new service for free too.  Second, if that board was found to be doing something wrong, possibly illegal, and someone wanted to shut it down, the customers receiving the service for free would fight to make sure that did not happen because they cannot get that deal anywhere else and they don’t want to lose this great deal.  If a vote is required to make necessary changes guess who they will support regardless if it is right to do so or not.  It doesn’t matter that the 40% paying for the service has to pay an outrageous amount; the 60% class doesn’t care.

Does anyone else have a problem with this?

Could a business like this really exist in the United States?

Could this answer the question, “Why the number of poor are rising like never before?”

I believe the “leadership” wants 60% of the population dependant on them and they will do everything they can to make that happen.

Consider this final thought.  The Democratic Party says they are the party for the poor yet the American Dream is the ability of anyone to be able to rise from poverty to wealth regardless of your race, color, creed or gender.

I believe in this dream with my whole heart.

Should not every politician that takes the oath of office also believe this dream regardless of their party affiliation?

If the Democrats truly believed this dream wouldn’t they also understand that every law that they pass would be one to shrink their party’s size, reducing those dependant on them.  If every law was designed to help people get out of poverty they would eventually have a smaller population of the poor to be the party of.

Now in this political climate, that is a true dream.

If this is my last post, I want all to know there was only one purpose for all that I have written; to have made a positive difference in the lives of others.

Anthony “Tony” Boquet

Author of “The Bloodline of Wisdom, The Awakening of a Modern Solutionary”

Author: Anthony Boquet

Anthony “Tony” Boquet, a native of South Louisiana and a resident of Franklin, TN. For 37 years he has been happily married to Toni Ann. They have two children, Thomas and Tiffany and three adorable grandchildren, Madison, Blake and Tyler. His hobbies include writing and reading, playing guitar, instructing TaeKwonDo and self-defense classes in HapKiDo, and riding motorcycles. Published Author “Bloodline of Wisdom, An Awakening of a Modern Solutionary” Released through Bush Publishing. A regular contributor in the Christian Family Publications and numerous financial journals and publications He holds multiple professional credentials bestowed by The American College of Financial Services Member of: St. Philip’s Catholic Church Knights of Columbus – 4th Degree The American College Alumni Association The Society of Financial Service Professionals Graduate: Purdue University Professional Management Institute Experiences includes: Adjunct Instructor on Leadership, Ethics, and Insurance related topics Financial Planner / Estate Planner Dynamic Public Speaker Faith and Business instructor on Ethical and Moral Wisdom Board Member of various Non-Profit organizations Business leader for 34 years Expert witness in insurance related court cases He is currently a Vice President at The American College Tony is excited to be finalizing work on his second book.

2 thoughts on “Governance vs. Social Engineering”

  1. The Government cannot give to anyone anything that the government does not first take from
    someone else.
    You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
    What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
    When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work, because the other half is going
    to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because someone
    else is going to get what they worked for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *