hongkong-is-bad

Equality in Hong Kong is Bad

There have been many explanations for the turmoil in Hong Kong, which is now entering its 16th week. However, what has not been touched on is a matter of the strong relationship between the business and political elite in the city, and the highly lame system of government.

In explaining the source of the unrest in Hong Kong, predictably, many leaders blame the liberal sciences in schools. Policymakers find it hard to believe that students can have the ability to understand critically about politics and society – especially active participation.

On the other hand, the anger of the demonstrators was directed mostly to the governments of China and Hong Kong, especially Chief Executive Carrie Lam. Lam’s actions – with a stubborn bureaucratic attitude – made the situation worse, so did the actions of the police who were once praised “Best in Asia” and the Chinese authorities.

All of these actions have hardened the local identity that became increasingly clear to the demonstrators as the turmoil continued.

Moreover, the feeling of mutual hatred has been so severe that it seems unlikely that anyone will back down. In recent weeks escalation seems easier.

Hopeless without hope

However, the most likely explanation for this turmoil is not the educational curriculum or the influence of Beijing, but the state of the government and the people of Hong Kong itself.

The opposite of the image the hk pools government wants to display – namely obedience to the law and a very good business environment – the city has actually been rotting for decades

First, Hong Kong has experienced a “loss” – a situation when an industry is gone and nothing is replaced – as experienced by other industrialized countries.

They find it difficult to move to public housing. “Nano apartments” which are sized as matchboxes are the only choice for many people, and many flats are inhabited by families until there are children and grandchildren.

Hong Kong youths, who grew up with golden tycoon stories such as Li Ka Shing (who is fondly called “Superman”) also face a bleak future because they are trapped in low-paying, menial jobs.

Why don’t the demonstrators focus on the business elite

Although some of the richest people in the region have voiced support for the government, very few demonstrators expressed anger at the elite economic group.

This proves the strength of the myth of the origins of modern Hong Kong and how rich Hong Kong is considered good. There is a kind of respect for the tycoons in this city, coupled with a lack of class consciousness and dislike that is embedded in anything that seems politically “left”.

Although universal political rights are the main demand of the demonstrators, this demand is more related to the election of the chief executive, not to the structure of government itself.

Rebuilding hopes and cities

The efforts of young people to shape a better future should be appreciated. But, for Hong Kong to have a positive future, this city needs a large-scale economic and political transformation.

Political rights are part of this transformation, but that is not enough. The question for Hong Kong is whether the demonstrators and other community members understand what needs to be done thoroughly and whether they are able to move together to make it happen.

portland

What Disaster hit Portland?

Earl Blumenauer brought MAX train to Portland and created congestion on purpose. Does he find congestion exciting, or is this part of the master plan to get everyone to take the train and bus? Click this link and judge for yourself:

A report portlandfacts shows how congestion harms many stores, who go out of business or barely hang on with the minimum staff to survive, boosting Oregon’s unemployment rate, already among the highest in the nation. Portland is near the top of the “Urban Misery Index,” up there with New Orleans, which is still recovering from the epic Katrina hurricane.

The disaster that hit Portland was Earl Blumenauer’s transportation policies. Buses are far less expensive, and much more responsive to traveler’s needs, than any train. Portland has squandered untold millions on trains and will squander millions more forever in subsidies. Buses are more energy-efficient and go to more places, with more convenient locations. Trains are so expensive that they crowd out spending on bus lines. In San Francisco and Los Angeles, the building of the train systems increased costs so much they had to cut back on bus routes. Even after spending millions on trains, bus ridership has not returned to pre-train levels. Fewer people there use public transportation now than rode the buses then!

When factoring in energy use to build the lines, trains actually use more energy per passenger mile than cars. The increased energy used in producing a typical system would take 172 years to recoup! Using diesel or propane buses decreases greenhouse gases for those that consider this a problem, far less than trains powered by fossil fuels in most areas. Cities that genuinely want to reduce greenhouse gases should instead invest in simple, cost-effective congestion reduction techniques, such as traffic signal coordination. The Federal Highway Administration says that three out of four traffic signals are not properly coordinated with other nearby signals. A 2003 signal coordination project in San Jose, California, is saving motorists 471,000 gallons of fuel per year. At $2 per gallon, the savings more than paid for the project in the first year. Gas prices are now around $3 per gallon, making the savings even larger. Not only that, but idling cars in traffic jams is a major cause of pollution. Such a simple, but logical and proven way to save money, reduce congestion, and lower pollution is the exact opposite approach implemented by Earl Blumenauer. What did he do to reduce congestion? Why, widen sidewalks, of course.

The traffic is bad in Portland because the planners wanted it that way! They want to make your commute extra-long and frustrating in the hopes that you’ll pack up your family and move to a small apartment downtown. It has never worked out to their satisfaction, but they’ll keep trying until you’re so fed up you’ll move or your employer will move. But they won’t move downtown. They’ll move to another state. The reason a new interstate bridge with more lanes has not been added is due to this romantic attachment to trains and a false nostalgia of happy village life that trains would supposedly foster.

The idea that a train would bring development has been repeatedly proven wrong. Portland Rezoned areas along the MAX and waited ten years. No development occurred. They then gave tax exemptions to builders. Now development occurred, but it decreased the money available for schools, firemen, police, etc. They are now trying to expand the train system and looking at closing Jefferson and Benson High Schools. It seems to me they are closing schools to pay for more light rail.

For many people, the train, an eighteenth-century innovation, is not a viable or practical option. Those with disabilities, parents with small children, and those going to places not served by train end up subsidizing the few who do ride the rails. Buses are not chained to a track and can be used on any road, can stop on any corner, and provide easy access to people who need transportation. Bus schedules can be easily adjusted to meet increased demand and high traffic hours. Several lanes of roads can be built for the cost of just one track, and the annual maintenance is much less. Why would anyone decide to pay ten times more for something that does not provide as many benefits? Is it romance and nostalgia for a time that never was? Is it “sustainability” or “livability?” What is sustainable or liveable about high unemployment, homelessness, hunger, closing schools, or cutting services? Are tax exemptions for the politically connected and pork projects funneling money to campaign coffers sustainable? Visit this website for more.

People have voted against the train system repeatedly. Our elected officials do not care what we want. The only way to get them to care is to vote them out of office.

I have chosen to enter this race at great cost and personal sacrifice.  If you too want to end the erosion of our rights, our prosperity, and our constitution, won’t you join in supporting my campaign?  If you can afford the maximum donation of $2400 that would be greatly appreciated.  But even if you can afford only $10 or even $5, that too will be appreciated and used for maximum effect.

And if you can not afford the money, please give of your time.  We can always use more volunteers.  I can not do it alone, I need your help.  We may be fast approaching the end of the time that we can turn things around.  So if you can afford the money, give what you can.  If you can afford the time, give off that also.  But whatever you decide to do, remember the words of a great American statesman, who said, “let it not be said that we chose to do nothing.”

Government protection?

Like Cap and Tax, which will guarantee higher energy bills while lining a few people’s pockets and improving the environment, how? S. 510 will further drive up the costs of living by adding more layers of bureaucracy on food production – ensuring you pay more to meet an essential need.

poster_protection

Congress certainly won’t be the one tightening its belt.  Section 401 of S. 510 authorizes nearly $1 billion to grow the FDA’s reach and calls for almost 4,000 new bureaucrats to be hired in the fiscal year 2010 alone.

This onerous new law will apply harshly to reputable food producers like the independent family farm, where the free market works every day to provide the public with healthy choices.

Meanwhile, Big Agriculture will continue to use its well-entrenched connections to make sure it escapes serious scrutiny.

The statists have worked to replace “credible evidence” with “reasonable probability” in the U.S. Code, giving the FDA power to invade, quarantine, or shut down private property in search of any foodborne illness.

They also changed “presents a threat of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals” to “is adulterated or misbranded.”  What exactly constitutes adulterated?  That glass of raw milk?  An FDA bureaucrat will decide. It gets worse.

The bill also grants blanket authority for federal agencies to impose international guidelines and standards on domestic food producers – giving agencies the authority to harmonize all American food production and processes in line with the globalist Codex.

Big Brother and Big Agriculture are combating the truly modern way to improve food safety by targeting the rapidly growing number of food producers who, through the free market, provide diversity and give us choices.

The establishment is pushing for more consolidation and is looking to control your food choices to make it happen. Don’t stomach another round of tyranny. Please help us get more freedom, less government regulation, message out by donating to our radio blitz fundraiser. Thank you to those of you that already have.

This is a bipartisan effort to remove control freaks from our seat in Washington DC, Rasmussen Polls have shown that for all the lamestream media attacks 41% of the Tea Party Patriots are Democrats and 49% are Republicans. Americans that want the government to do the job we created them to do, Protect our Rights! We the people need to regain control.

Thank you

Delia Lopez

PS
We will be having a Delia Lopez for Congress Radiothon Fundraiser on Sept. 16th, 9 am to 9 pm Eastern time Listen in www.dlopezforcongress.com Call in 505-715-6522 Michael Badnarik, Sheriff Mack, Frantz Kebreau and Frank Anderson are among the already confirmed guests.

independence

Independence

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.

So starts the greatest document ever written the declaration of Independence. So much is said in just those 182 words. A bold statement that turned the world on its’ head. Until this time most government’s focus was on a king. The king was thought to be in some way divine, above all other people and everything belonged to him. His subjects could live on his land if they paid their annual duty. If they fought in his military if needed to extend his throne or protect his interests. If they were not caught saying anything against the king. Our founding fathers followed the Bible as a guide. Thomas Jefferson was a biblical scholar and noted that when the Israelites followed the instructions within their country they prospered and when they did not, the people suffered. He noted the Saxons among others also followed the biblical guidelines for governing people with the same results. He was a wise man who studied history and learned from it. Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and we are!

The idea that all men are created by a creator, and given rights by the creator that are inalienable which means they can not be taken away from the person, by anyone at any time or for any reason! The idea that men created governments to secure those rights! Protect man’s rights to life, to liberty and to pursue happiness. The duty of government is to protect the rights of the individual, that is the reason for its creation and when it fails to do that, the people have the right to abolish it. That legitimate governments only exist by the consent of the governed. Our constitution was written very precisely to limit the power of government, to protect the rights of the people. The Federal government was to be especially restrained because the government closest to the problem is most efficient and the people are better able to maintain control. Our founding fathers knew that governments had violated the rights of men more so than other individual men ever could. Thomas Jefferson said, “The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.”

The separation of powers was of huge importance in keeping the government from growing into a tyrannical monster. As Thomas Jefferson stated, “When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.” They set up three separate sources of power the representative branch to follow the will of the people, the senate to maintain the power of the states. The judicial was to hold the line when those two houses overstepped their constitutional limitations. The 17th amendment to the constitution fundamentally altered our form of government and has shifted power away from the states.

We declared our independence in 1776 and already by 1798 Thomas Jefferson was authoring the Virginia resolution A small excerpt is here “ That the General Assembly doth also express its deep regret, that a spirit has in sundry instances, been manifested by the federal government, to enlarge its powers by forced constructions of the constitutional charter which defines them; and that implications have appeared of a design to expound certain general phrases” As our federal government has increased its’ power and overstepped its constitutional boundaries our representatives have discovered a way to benefit themselves at our expense. To use campaign donations to benefit the politically connected. Every time in history when the government powers expand a two-class system develops the peasants (people) and the politically connected. Even now government employees are earning on average twice what the people paying their salaries to earn, add in benefits and the discrepancy is worse.

Companies now lobby Congress for tax exceptions, laws and regulations to benefit themselves and harm the competition. The free market system has always produced the greatest amount of wealth and prosperity in any nation it exists in. We have not had a free market system in this nation for 100 years. Free market economies produce a vibrant middle class, an environment where an individual starting with nothing can work hard and move up in the economic levels of society. In government-run systems, the rich get richer and the poor poorer and the middle class is non-existent. This is the direction our nation is heading our middle class is shrinking at an alarming rate and the earnings of the middle class are being taken and given to the very rich through bailouts and the poor with “welfare systems” our governments’ tax system is utilized to benefit those that can donate to campaigns. Companies now lobby Congress to get regulations enacted that will harm their competitors, or get tax breaks for themselves, again harming competition and killing anything close to a free market.

We must retake congress, remove the power from the federal realm to benefit any corporation. We created this government to secure our rights. The constitution was written to limit the power of government especially the federal government. We must work to return the checks and balances that have been destroyed over the years and return our government to the Republic of limited power it originated as. Ben Franklin’s answer “A Republic if you can keep it” is more than a little prophetic. We have lost it and must now work to restore our Republic.