Volume 7, Issue 7
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of Queens applauded Amazon’s decision saying that the $3 billion given to Amazon could be better spent on the subway and other needs of the poor. By this, she implied that New York City had the $3 billion in hand and was giving it to Amazon when, in fact, the $3 billion was a tax incentive only realized if Amazon created new jobs.
The tax package negotiated between the city, state and Amazon projected a 9-to-1 ratio of new dollars for the public sector for every dollar of tax incentive. In other words, for Amazon to realize $3 billion in tax relief, they would have had to generate $27 billion in new tax revenue. Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez did not seem to project the economic understanding that the $3 billion was not in-hand government money available to appropriate.
Mayor de Blasio took issue with any progressive who does not believe in job creation and a fairly negotiated public-private partnership. The new jobs to be created were above minimum wage. No additional costs for city services were anticipated. The workforce primarily would be supplied by citizens of New York City, Queens, and surrounding boroughs. This was a good deal for New York.
Senator Elizabeth Warren, a recently announced candidate for President of the United States, declared victory for the people, opining that they stood up to corporate greed. Senator Warren and Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez are the new faces and spokespersons for socialism, retooled and rebranded as progressivism. They champion government services as a right of the people.
Who really pays the cost of The Consequences of Ideological Pursuit?
The costs are paid and realized by the average citizen. Every man and woman who is pursuing happiness as referenced by their individual talents is taxed by lost opportunity. In Queens, the potential prospect for 27,000 new jobs has been squandered. Who paid the price? Did Senator Warren give up her job and privileges? No. Did Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez give up her position or privileges? No. Yet they pursue their socialistic, ideological utopia without sensitivity or recognition of reality that there is no immediate or acceptable alternative to creating 27,000 middle-class jobs, economic activity that would generate $27 billion in new revenue for the boroughs and State of New York.
During the federal government shutdown, federal workers went without pay. Budgets were stretched. Families were stressed. Did any member of Congress in either party offer to forgo a paycheck or funding of their offices during the government closure? A few discussed it. None committed to it. Speaker Nancy Pelosi prepared to take advantage of a government-paid military airplane for travel to Afghanistan. Was the trip’s mission critical? No. Did any crisis develop because of the cancellation of the Congressional junket? No. The Speaker’s insensitivity to the workers paying the price of her ideological pursuit is absolutely astounding. In all fairness, neither did anyone on the White House staff forgo a paycheck. The point is, government leaders are out of touch with reality and the true needs of the people.
And, so it has always been throughout history, until 1776.
Up to and through the late 18th century, society was basically a derived structure of birth-determined destiny. You were born into a class system. Nobles declared privilege as a right. It was not. The Declaration of Independence was pivotally revolutionary in that it declared all rights come from God, and destiny is not determined by birth. Further, a right was defined as something that belonged to everyone. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of right to assembly are universal rights. No one should be taxed, restricted, regulated, or coerced to produce a right for someone else.
Socialists declare government services as a right. They are not. Health care may be a priority. In fact, it may be the number one priority of society if all citizens collectively decide that they are willing to pay whatever it costs for government health care. That does not mean that there should be no private health insurance. An individual should be able to determine the best option for themselves and their family. Socialists will sacrifice freedom on the altar of ideology without respect or concern for the consequences of lost opportunity paid by the people.
Socialist ideology replaces nobles with government as a predetermined right of privilege.
Mayor de Blasio on Meet the Press decried fellow progressives who criticized the Amazon partnership. He argued that he negotiated a fair deal for the citizens of New York City and the creation of high paying jobs. He went so far as to say that there was a moral requirement in such public-private structure. When queried about the term ‘morals,’ he immediately retracted the statement to emphasize fairness.
In 1788, Adam Smith, a capitalist, and John Wesley, a Methodist minister, debated and then agreed that capitalism needed the guidelines of Christian morality to keep it on a sound course for the good of the people. They were not afraid of the word morality. Why? Because, at the time, the Christian faith professed that God was the moral authority, and government policy should yield to the truth of His word. Whether one was a Christian or not, there was little dissent because the moral guidelines benefitted all people. Ideology effectiveness was measured by the axioms of the Founding Fathers’ faith.
For either capitalism or socialism to provide egalitarianism, a foundation of morality, underpinning the initiatives, must be employed. Secularists are silent on the basis of the creed for their code of ethics. Is it inherent in the evolution of man? In the composite collective wisdom of mankind, is government the moral compass? Neither proposition has any more founding in truth than what socialists claim about Christians, that they are blind in their faith. At least Christians have the eye-witness recorded word of historical events as their reference.
Mayor de Blasio has just learned first-hand that his fellow progressives care very little about practical objectives, outcome deliverables, or the plight of the average citizen. They only care about the abstraction of control and standardization which is the essence of socialism. They are not only deaf to the pleas of the citizens, 56% of the citizens of Queens were in support of the Amazon deal. They are in defiance and disregard for those who pay the price of The Consequences of Ideological Pursuit.
The irony is that socialists claim government rights for We the People. History teaches that We the People are the ones who give rights to government.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?