Nov
02
2010

  No Thanks To Here

I'm glad Hurt beat Perriello, but no thanks to many of the folks around here. About 57% of the county voters went for the incumbent, along with nearly 80% of the Charlottesville city voters. Good grief, where am I living, that people support that guy? Fortunately, there are other counties in the district!

The breakdown is on the Virginia Board of Elections website.

And it looks like there are enough people fed up with the Democratic Party agenda nationwide that there is a chance to reverse some of the more bone-headed policies they've pushed through lately.

Terry and I both think it's a shame that most Libertarians are such eggheads. They would've been much better informed than most of these "Tea Party" folks (having held their positions and philosophies for many years already, instead of inventing new ones on the fly). But it does seem like Libertarians have a bit of a conundrum finding an enthusiastic and charismatic candidate-- most politicians are not in favor of extremely limited government, because that means there is less for them to do! But that's exactly what Libertarians want, for the government to do MUCH LESS than it's currently attempting (and failing) to do.

Nevertheless, with the rise of the Tea Party movement, at least the GOP has (hopefully) gotten the picture that the people want it to return to a SMALL GOVERNMENT platform. Over the years, the Republican politicians had gotten just as bad as the liberals when it came to starting up new government programs.

Maybe if the new leadership brings results the American people like, they'll go further down the path of restoring our Constitutional liberties from the strangulation of excessive regulations. I'd be very happy to see vast swaths of government bureaucracy dismantled. The no-brainer to me is getting rid of the Education Department, and return authority to the states. Some states are doing a great job educating their students, and others not so much. If the Federal government got out of the way, I think it would be easier for the states to ferret out winning strategies and implement them.

Also, I think there needs to be means-testing for Social Security. It's supposed to be a social safety net, not some government-sponsored pension for all. It should transfer payments to the elderly and disabled poor to keep them from going hungry. It should not be going to the wealthy retirees so they have a little extra each month to pay their greens fees. Means-testing would go a long way to making the system solvent, I think. The problem is that so many people have come to see it as an entitlement that they don't bother saving for their own retirement, and are relying on social security payments for their basic living expenses. This is a social problem, fostered by politicians of all stripes. Terry and I are not counting on getting anything back from the government for retirement. If policies continue as they have been, there just isn't going to be anything left when we're of standard retirement age. If there is, great, we'll take it. But we're planning to support ourselves without government handouts, and wish more people would plan on doing the same. And here's a hint about how to do it: it's not about where you invest your savings. You just need to save way more than you probably are, and put it in the bank, without worrying about trying to make up gains through investments. Advisors don't like giving that advice to people, because people don't like to hear it, and they want to get fees from managing your money. Just sayin'.