Welfare spending versus prison spending. Which one actually benefits the taxpayer.
In this intellectual study on the overall corruption of a police state, I will show cause for a strengthened Federal government entity, as well, I shall show need for state governments to be put into debt to the people through the Federal entity in order to regain the freedom from oppression. Interestingly enough, the overall data that is used in this paper is the same data with which our collegiate educated are creating a state run class based system in order to complete their overall control base, strengthening their prison system and creating the need for war. The usage of invented lies in order to confuse the general public, that are then forced into overwork for the purpose of mere survival, the continual struggle as it were, delineates the perpetual ineptitude of our civilian elected ruling class and their inability to conceive of their own eventual demise. Include the fact that these elected individuals are not even able to comprehend the fact that they have been subverted into this behavior throughout the last two generations, makes this study even more important.
1.) Fundamental background on the intellectual capabilities of the collegiate educated civilian elected officials.
In order to get across to the reader the need to elect officials based upon alliance to the Federal rather than the state officials, I will use a form of intellectualism called exposure. Here we shall study a few of the more popular topics being used within today's political arena. First though, we must understand the operational stratagem of the collegiate foundation within the political structure. The most common technique, as I have studied, is itself psychologically unsound. This “technique” intuitively is aptly named “politicking”.
Definition of “Politicking” - source = http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Politicking
politicking [ˈpɒlɪˌtɪkɪŋ]
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) political activity, esp seeking votes
2. activity directed towards acquiring power and influence, achieving one's own goals, etc.
politicker n
This definition is therefore lacking in total comprehension of the overall terminology and needs further explanation and fact based analysis. Though plainly we can see through this definition that the individual politician benefits from this typical campaign, not the masses. Politicking is itself a form of structured infighting disguised as true conflict. Both sides of the political arena in this “technique” are in actuality the same side, however, and whichever politician wins, they will both inevitably benefit. No other single or group entity will in the long term benefit from anything that comes out of this form of politics, though it may seem that there is gain in the short term when giving support to one or the other. I urge the reader not to ever believe a single thing a politician using this “technique” promises.
Example of “politicking” - source = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/14/obama-gay-marriage-strengthens-families_n_1516416.html
And for the “other sides view” source = http://technorati.com/politics/article/mitt-romney-signs-anti-gay-pledge/
As we can see in the above articles, both sides are working within the same spectrum in order to more fully subvert American ideology, in reality it doesn't matter which side wins, as long as they are able to keep the more important pressing matter, the amount of poverty inside the United States, from being exposed whilst they campaign. This form of “politicking” is in itself used to guise former failure through policy introduced by past administrations. Obviously, politicians using the “politicking” technique are not capable of fact based political procedure, and ultimately must rely on guise in order to prevent the masses from becoming too aware of their fellow collegiate fraternal failure through media exposure.
We must as intellectuals also study the ideological synchronicity throughout societal infrastructure. As such, we shall here take example of Tupac and Notorious B.I.G. Obviously these two individuals were in fact the best of friends who in reality had been working jointly on projects to encourage album sales throughout their musical industry. On the surface however, Tupac seemingly disjointed himself economically and institutionally from the original empire of the “Hip Hop” organization. The cooperative monetary base in effect was of the same origin, though not topically understood. In order to spawn interactive competition and further sales, the monetary base prepared a typical campaign. This monetary base, A.K.A. “The Jewish Defense League” - http://www.jdl.org/ and “The Jewish Task Force” - http://www.jtf.org/ , who incidentally partake of the “politicking” technique themselves in order to perpetuate their own seemingly individual corporate entities, furthered a “rap war” between their next two big sellers. The inevitable outcome was the death of both rappers in order to create a prolonged sales base, and is probably the hidden reason the monetary base initiated this type of “campaign” to begin with.
The above information shows strategic cooperation within current political “events” tied to possible monetary influence, that will problematically evolve in much a like manner for the current institutional politicians. I warn the reader, foreign operational military intelligence provides the necessary base stratagem, whilst foreign provincial political standing provides for a ripe environment capable of nurturing this ineptitude to it's fullest.
Reminding the reader of the current responsibility of current political policy, being so factored out of current politics, is itself essential to the readers base knowledge and comprehension. To say that one is more apt in ability due to educational standing gives the illusion of intellectual capability and specific ability to achieve within a given sector. This is obviously, as we now understand, not the case. The politician within even the federal arena is obviously intertwined more within state policy than federal law, inevitably leading the future generations downward into a chasm of indifference toward the failed policy and loss of individual protection formerly provided by the federal institution.
2.) Welfare spending, the truth, the feeble coverup attempts, the lies and eventual demise.
A lot of controversy on the topic of welfare has come into the forefront of the political arena of late, the most important topic though as of yet has not been discussed, the topic of where the welfare money goes after it has been received by the unfortunate individual. As with most other topics within the United States political arena, the truth is being confused with false facts distributed throughout the World Wide Web by Google and it's affiliate mass media. This trend we should also address, in order to achieve something that we have yet left unaccomplished, truth based accounting within governmental spending. Here an attempt is made to bring understanding to individual tax payer as well as small and large business owners, in order to show causal benefit from fair welfare distribution. Most intellectuals often decide upon facts even before a fair amount of information is given about an individual topic, that leads to the furtherance of speculation until the actuality of information has indeed been announced. This leads us into a determined opinionated factual base, reliant solely upon individual corruption, and can be quite difficult to remove once infiltration has occurred, due to the lack of initial given subject information at the beginning of debate, and the media exposure that undoubtedly ensues. The topic of welfare is one of these informational dependencies, therefore I will only address appropriate subject matter within this particular arena. A resultant hierarchical mapping of taxation is necessary for the overall understanding in any monetary debate, and with said there is no immediate need of any statistical data that might be corrupted. Please refer to attached. As you can plainly see in the mapping I have provided, the taxpayer actually benefits from the fair distribution of tax money through the welfare system, as it inevitably is spent on goods, and therefore returns to the pocket of the taxpayer. In this mapping we can also see that the money will not return to the taxpayer through the prison system. The choice then is obvious, given the understanding that the tax money will most definitely be spent on one of the two, and since we all know that any mean data will undoubtedly be corrupt, even the attempt at achieving such data will remain elusive until a federal oversight committee has been established in order to provide this information more accurately. I would imagine that receiving ones own tax monies back should be incentive enough to create a lasting favorable welfare system, that would in turn determinedly alleviate the individual unfortunate from, unfavorable entities that work together to exploit poverty, creating a win:win situational outcome. Work as of yet incomplete.
