Argument For a Return to a "Gilded Age" Government

With how big and diverse of a nation America is, we would be far better off as a federation of largely autonomous states, which is precisely how America was in our golden age, historically known as"The Gilded Age".

"In United States history, the Gilded Age refers to the era of rapid economic and population growth in the United States during the post–Civil War and post-Reconstruction eras of the late 19th century.The Gilded Age is most famous for the creation of a modern industrial economy. During the 1870s and 1880s, the U.S. economy rose at the fastest rate in its history, with real wages, wealth, GDP, and capital formation all increasing rapidly. For example, between 1865 and 1898, the output of wheat increased by 256%, corn by 222%, coal by 800% and miles of railway track by 567%. Thick national networks for transportation and communication were created. The corporation became the dominant form of business organization, and a managerial revolution transformed business operations. By the beginning of the 20th century, per capita income and industrial production in the United States led the world, with per capita incomes double that of Germany or France, and 50% higher than Britain.

The Gilded Age saw the greatest period of economic growth in American history. Eventually, the United States produced over one third of certain international goods such as steel and oil. After the short-lived panic of 1873, the economy recovered with the advent of hard money policies and industrialization. From 1869 to 1879, the US economy grew at a rate of 6.8% for NNP (GDP minus capital depreciation) and 4.5% for NNP per capita. The economy repeated this period of growth in the 1880s, in which the wealth of the nation grew at an annual rate of 3.8%, while the GDP was also doubled. Real wages also increased greatly during the 1880s."

The Gilded Age was followed by the "progressive era", which was dominated by FUD (fear uncertainty and doubt), and socially progressive (which translates to naive and ignorant) measures-- stuff like the "Prohibition", socialist feminism (which has done more to destroy American morality than just about anything IMO), and "reforms" in virtually every aspect of life, and every business industry-- which incidentally culminated in the Federal Reserve, the hallmark of the Progressive Era. What the important thing here is that "progressives" then (and now, from the looks of it) got off to fixing government policies that weren't broken, and expanding the government's power to cover areas that people were happy and prosperous without such interference.

The Progressive Age effectively destroyed the prosperity of America through the expansion of government in the name of, ironically enough, "eliminating corruption" (pot calling the kettle black much?) Politicians started utilizing war (starting with the Spanish-American War, and later with such wars as World War I) to force the states to unite against a common enemy, and exploited the FUD(fear, uncertainty, and doubt) in the nation to insert pieces of nationwide legislation which, were it not for the wars (and other engineered socio-economic crisis's such as the two "Great Panics") would be condemned by the states and people as unconstitutional. Things have been becoming more and more corrupt in America since then, and our national debt and high rates of crime/other disturbing trends reflect that.

My Views on Climate Change, and its Effects on Civil Liberties

First, I would to clarify to both sides of the argument of climate change that I neither believe, nor disbelieve in global warming. so  who believes that I am a conspiracy theorists or in any way against the current focus of scientific studies, rest assured I believe that any field of scientific inquiry, whether valid in its assumptions or not, is acceptable so long as it does not infringe on the inalienable rights of individuals. Which brings me to my pain point:

I am not so much against climate change, as I am against the lack of transparency in the scientific community surrounding it, the corruption and lobbying efforts on *both* sides of the argument, and (most importantly) I am against any government exploiting science (whether valid in its arguments or not) to generate FUD and use climate change as a reason to expand the size and scope of the federal government.

The reason why I think there is a strong possibility of the government-sponsored investigations being corrupted, is _because_ they were government-sponsored, and furthermore, the two countries involved in the investigations have a long history of using "facts" to mislead the public, and using the mainstream media as their strong arm to push a liberal agenda of government expansion. It has nothing to do specifically with climate change, except in that climate change has enough evidence backing it for the government (and the U.N., which has also become corrupt) to use it as an excuse to expand its powers.

In conclusion, I would like to remind everyone that there are three types of untruths: lies, damned lies, and statistics. So at the very least, the "evidence" of climate change is built on a very unreliable foundation indeed, as its "legitimacy" is almost wholly grounded in statistics, and the interpretation thereof. 

But there's at least one site, founded by the discoverer of Climate change, which at least provide transparency. Now that's progress! http://www.realclimate.org/

Wake Up America- Iran is Not A Threat!

   
Wake up America. Iran is not a threat. Israel is the one stacking up nuclear warheads, Iran is just enriching uranium and creating nuclear fuel rods. Why is it that the threat of the radical Zionist country Israel is completely ignored, and all of the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) is being dumped on Iran, for which despite decades of espionage and sabotage operations, there never beenany evidence of Iran producing nuclear arms. This preoccupation and pissing contest with Iran is absolutely ridiculous!

Ok people, let's look at this in a logical fashion. Iran has an extremely imbalanced economy. Petroleum accounts for 80% of its exports. With oil prices being so volatile, and the overall demand for oil actually leveling off, this kind of situation is an economic nightmare To top it all, all the FUD from Israel, the United States, and other world powers is sanctioning trade with Iran all over the place, so let's put things into perspective:

Iran needs to develop nuclear power to balance its currently impoverished and unstable economy. Considering the political environment of the middle east, Why would Iran develop nuclear weapons,especially when they already know Israel already has nuclear arms and the means to deploy them,not to mention a military force so good at what they do, that they are the preferred partner for the U.S. to train our soldiers?

For once, instead of taking the FUD approach, let's be logical and insert a little rational, Occum's razor in there. Think you can do that? If so, that would be greatly appreciated!

http://rt.com/news/iran-nuclear-program-achievements-411/