Incredibly Stupid Stuff the Japanese Government Wastes Our Tax Money On

I am simply amazed sometimes at the stupid crap that the government wastes our tax money on. Now, they say a picture speaks a thousand words but before you look at this picture, let me explain that this is a photo that hangs upon the wall at one of my favorite watering holes in Setagaya-ku, Tokyo.


That's Tokyo as in "Tokyo, Japan"... Now, look at the picture. Is there anything that strikes you as strange about what this poster says and the fact that it is hanging on the wall of a restaurant in Japan?

Promoting tourism to Japan to people who are already in Japan? Brilliant!

They do idiotic things like this and then at the end of the fiscal year, every year, they tell us that they need more money because they are broke.


They're not broke. Just stupid.


Any questions?


----


Oh, and here's a freebie that I saw the other day that irritated me too. These police that you see in Japan that are giving out tickets and stopping drivers aren't doing that to prevent accidents or protect the public safety. They are an covert taxation force. 


Here is a photo of these bottom-dwelling, scum sucking, Tax-feeders who think that it takes three of them on their police motorcycles to chase down some guy on a bicycle who ran a red-light... Three of them!? Unbelievable.

Of course I complained to them and asked them why it required three of them to chase down this dangerous criminal bicycle riding desperado and why they weren't out chasing real criminals and all they did was ignore me and keep yelling at this bicyclist.


Oh, did I say the word, "stupid?" I did? Okay. Thanks.

You commit negligence and someone dies? Go to prison. The police commit negligence and someone dies? Go on vacation - with pay!

Let's talk about the "Good Ol' Boys network" of corruption and a corrupt government and the police...

What would happen to you at work if you shirked your duties and went off on a vacation leaving important matters unattended?


You'd most probably lose your job because your boss would fire you immediately upon your return (if he didn't fire you while you were gone).


What would happen to you if, in the course of your daily affairs or duties, you made a serious mistake in judgement that resulted in someone getting seriously injured or crippled for life?


You'd most probably would get sued in court and be paying money for the rest of your life and go to jail.


What would happen to you if you made a mistake driving a car and hit someone by accident and injured them or killed them?


Depending upon the circumstances, you might lose your driving license, go to jail or even lose your house, family and your job. 

What would happen to you if, in the course of your duties at work or at home, you committed negligence that resulted in death? 


You would probably go to jail for a long time... No matter what, you'd lose your job and be sued in court and be paying money for the rest of your life. You'd probably lose your house and family too.


How about if you knowingly committed negligence that resulted in the death of, not one, but two people? What would happen to you then?


Oh, you'd lose your job in disgrace, go to prison for a long time and lose everything you owned and cared for....


How about if you worked for the police department and knowingly committed negligence that resulted in the death of, not one, but two people? What would happen to you then? 


Nothing much. You'd get "disciplinary action." A slap on the wrist or two. That's it. You wouldn't lose your job. You wouldn't take a pay cut. You would basically not have to face any of the penalties that the rest of us would face in the real world.


That's how it goes in Japan (and most countries today) as, you see, there are different laws for the peasants (you and me) and the ruling classes (politicians, rich, and government workers). That's what has happened in Chiba, Japan after the facts came out that when a father reported a stalking case to police in December of last year the police were too busy to take care of it. You, see, the police were busy planning a drinking vacation up north so they told the father to come back after they were back from vacation... While the cops were away, partying on the public dime, the man's wife and his mother-in-law were murdered by the stalker.


The Mainichi News has the story in Disciplinary action taken against Chiba police superintendent in stalking probe case

A police superintendent and 20 other police members were subjected to disciplinary action on April 23 over a case in which officers put off the handling of a stalking complaint and went ahead with a pleasure trip just days before a related double-murder took place.

Chiba Prefectural Police Superintendent Satoshi Kamada was handed a National Public Safety Commission warning, after his supervisory responsibility was questioned. Action was also taken against 20 other police members including then Narashino Police Station head Hitoshi Oba, who was served a reprimand. Police officials said Kamada had not received a report on the pleasure trip, but they judged that as a superintendent heading a probe into the series of events, he bore responsibility.

He was given a "warning"? Heavens! Is there a heavier penalty? Perhaps a handwritten note? It will say something like, "Next time we'll be serious!" And then, gasp, his "supervisory responsibility was questioned"? My god!


How about firing his a*s or serving up his head on a platter?

The double-murder took place on Dec. 16 last year. Mitsuko Yamashita, 56, and her 77-year-old mother-in-law Hisae were fatally stabbed, and police arrested 27-year-old Gota Tsutsui, who had been in a relationship with Yamashita's 23-year-old daughter, on suspicion of murder.

The daughter and other family members had earlier approached police in Chiba, Mie and Nagasaki Prefectures, seeking assistance and filing reports. On Dec. 6, 2011, they visited Narashino Police Station in Chiba Prefecture to try to file a report, but police put off questioning the daughter until Dec. 12.

The police pleasure trip took place between Dec. 8 and 10 last year, leaving the section chief of the station's criminal investigation department and the head of the department's life safety division absent from the station. However this fact was not mentioned in a report on the police probe into the case. Because of this, police apparently judged that the superintendent could not avoid punishment.

"Police apparently judged that the superintendent could not avoid punishment"?! Punishment? What's that? Did they make him sit in the corner for a day? Or did his friends ignore him in the police cafeteria? How about e loses his chance to buy raffle tickets at a discount for the end-of-year policeman's ball? 


It has been reported that the police chief has been "dismissed." But don't misunderstand what that means, folks. He was dismissed from his post. He wasn't fired, nor will he lose his job or pay or retirement pay. He was dismissed from his position.


He'll be back as station chief, at that station or another district, in no time. That's how it works. This sort of thing has happened many times.


That the people are not in an uproar over this is just astounding. I've spoken with several Japanese citizens about this case and, while they are disgusted, they shrug their shoulders and basically all told me the same thing: that this sort of episode happens often. 


The basic story is as I have related: The in-charge person is "disciplined." This "discipline" is announced in the mass media... Later on, it is revealed that the extent of the discipline is a 3 to 6 month transfer to another section only to be transferred back to their former job after that time. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.


It's all a part and parcel of the "Good Old Boys network."


Though dealing with the police in Japan is not nearly as dangerous or risky as dealing with the police in the USA, it basically comes down to the same thing, ultimately: There's different rules for our rulers and for us.


As the economy worsens and the government drains to lifeblood out of the working public to pay for unsustainable government spending and debt, one has to wonder just how long this will go on until something breaks.


The people shouldn't have to tolerate this. This is Japan, not the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany or the United States.

The Perfect Argument Against Bailouts and Big Government Spending in One Picture

They say a picture speaks a thousand words. Here's a comic that does. It shows why we should be against all nationalization of industry and bailouts of industry and banks as well as tax increase and adding debt to our already un-payable debt.

Of course the free market system (which, by the way, we haven't ever really tried - there's always government control and cronyism) has its warts... But the way we do things now (bailouts, credit rate control, printing money, government take over of industry, government controlled education, medical care and retirement) just doesn't work. The fact that we're heading for bankruptcy (Greece is showing us what's going to happen to us soon enough) shows that we must stop this big government mentality.


If an industry like banks or big companies like General Motors or TEPCO in Japan go bankrupt, let them! Why do private companies get to keep profits but when they lose money the government wants to socialize their loses and stick it to the taxpayer?


And some taxpayers actually agree with this twisted logic?


Say in the case of a company like GM. If we bail them out, the same incompetent management get to keep their jobs. If they go bankrupt, a new group comes in and buys them up. The new group gets rid of the bad parts. The factories are still there, the buildings are still there, the new company needs someone to run those factories; they get rid of bad management and bad workers and start again. That's why they buy a bankrupt company in the first place; they think they can make it profitable!


But, when the government bails them out? The incompetents keep their jobs (and donate to the next election of those government people) and confused people in the public sector think that those industries should be nationalized. Yes. Nationalized and run ostensibly for a profit. Like the profitable venture that our, say, Japanese government has us at public debt of 229% of GDP.


What's wrong with this logic and this picture?  


Anyway, the same old same old way of doing business that we've been doing for the last 40 years, since 1971, has got to stop. 


Haven't we screwed up the world for our kids and their kid's kids enough as it is?

Reasons Why I Don't Believe in it Anymore - Be Skeptical of Everything You Hear

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." - Ronald Reagan (1986)


I don't believe anything I see or hear on TV or radio and read in magazines anymore. Thirty plus years in mass media will make anyone very jaded and skeptical of everything coming out of the mouths of newscasters, scientists and politicians.

You wouldn't know it to read what I write about these days, but when I was a university student, I was pretty much a hard-core socialist, perhaps even a communist. Many people today are that way too but they don't like to use those words. Many people have been confused from decades of government run schooling.


I used to think - and I was taught in school - that the government is benevolent and needs to provide for people because the people are too useless and stupid to provide for themselves. That the people are stupid and useless is a pretty solid argument. But as I grew older, I began to learn that there is no such thing as a free lunch and for the government to take care of someone means that they are taking money from someone else.


You cannot keep taking money from the productive part of society and keep giving it to the unproductive part of society. We've been doing this for decades and not that's how we've gotten ourselves into the financial mess we're currently in.

Yep. Learn to live with it... Or marry a rich guy.

For example, the idea that the government should provide medical care, retirement care, or a so-called "free" education to everyone was some of the ideas that I believed were the duty of government. I believed those ideas because I went to government run public schooling. Of course, in government run schools, they will teach you that government run schooling is the best. That's what government's do. Is there a government in the world today that tells their public, "We are not the best government for you. Vote for another party!"


I clearly remember my 4th grade teacher, Mrs. Demuth sitting us in class and saying, "The United States has the best and the freest government in the world. And the proof of that is that we have had the same government for 200 years." That, my friends, isn't true. We've had the same political system for 200 years, but not the same government for 200 years. If longest running means that it is the best (typical American exceptionalism type of twisted thinking and logic) then I don't think America even comes close. The longest running government in the history of the world is probably Mao's China. Can anyone verify that for me? Not that it matters.

Cooler than any US president. How many of them can say "Warhol did me"? 

I knew, even then, that what my teachers were telling me wasn't true. That's one reason why I don't carte blanche believe anything that teachers say and am very skeptical about their pronouncements.


Then, in high school, I was president of the Science Class. We were told that the entire world was heading into a new Ice Age. Scientists were absolutely sure about that one too. There were even some scientists who said that we should put ash and salt on the polar ice caps to melt them so that would warm up the earth. That was 1975. I even wrote a 140 page thesis on it for my senior year. I was proud of that paper. But guess what? Even though the scare last a few more years, the Ice Age never happened. I became skeptical of science.


I became a devout disbeliever when, not trusting the media I worked in, I studied the subject. This from the Business and Media Institute of America:

"Many publications now claiming the world is on the brink of a global warming disaster said the same about an impending ice age – just 30 years ago. Several major ones, including The New York Times, Time magazine and Newsweek, have reported on three or even four different climate shifts since 1895."

Yes. Big disasters sell advertising space and create revenues. Follow the money if you are ever wondering about the validity of anything you are told on the mass media.

I makes sense when you think about it; they can't even predict next week's weather with better than a 50% chance of accuracy, what kind of fool thinks they can predict the weather 50 years from now?


A few years later, I became old enough to vote. The very first time I had the chance to vote for president. I voted for Jimmy Carter because I didn't want war. Carter won the first time. I was happy. Then, during his tenure, inflation hit 22% and I was a university student. I realized that, at that rate, there would be no jobs even if I did graduate. Then when it seemed like he would lose re-election to Ronald Reagan, he committed a crime by sending the military into Iran to try to rescue hostages. The mission was called Operation Eagle Claw. It was a disaster. Two of the helicopters crashed into each other and eight US servicemen died. The mission was called off.

Ruins of a burnt out Hercules troop carrier helicopter in Iran April 1980.

This was the guy I voted for!? I voted for him because I didn't want war yet he was sending our military in on military adventures in countries that we weren't at war with? I have never voted again, even once, since then.


Political hypocrites! That's one more reason why I don't believe anything that politicians say and am very skeptical about their pronouncements.

After that I worked for a Republican congressman from California named Bob Largomarsino. I was his chief staff cameraman. Congressman Bob was a nice guy. I travelled around with him and took photos of him visiting old folk's homes and shaking hands with people or going to lunch with other people. In the two years I worked for him, I never once took any photos of him actually doing an work besides schmoozing people. Then Reagan invaded Grenada.

This photo was congressman Bob's favorite. Him sitting between Reagan and Bush I.

This photo hung in his office. I didn't take this one.

They said they were invading Grenada because US students were being held hostage. We'd find out later that this wasn't true at all and many nations, including our allies like Britain were angry and upset about the USA breaking international law.


"What's the land of the free doing invading tiny Caribbean nations?" I thought. That was one more reason why I don't believe anything that politicians say and am very skeptical about their pronouncements.


The litany of being told one thing but later on finding out that the facts are different from what we were told is long. I could never name them all. Rick Gee had a good short list of government lies: 

• Woodrow Wilson: won reelection with the prevaricating slogan, "He kept us out of the war." (Well, at least he did until after the election. Typical politician).
• Bush I: "Read my lips: no new taxes." (Well, maybe just a few).
• Ronald Reagan: knew nothing of the Iran-Contra shenanigans. (The Teflon President, indeed).
• Bill Clinton: "I experimented with marijuana a time or two and I didn’t like it, and didn’t inhale and never tried it again." (Do you know anyone who tried it but didn’t like it?)
• Bill Clinton: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." ("Hey, I just sat there; she did all the relating herself.")
• Vince Foster committed suicide (how convenient).
• Richard Nixon: "I am not a crook." ("I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow.")
• Marijuana has no medicinal benefits. (Tell Peter McWilliams’ survivors that).
• Children are being molested in a compound in Waco (to protect them, we must kill them).
• "Let’s Roll." Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania because heroic passengers thwarted the hijackers. (That the U.S. Air Force shot down Flight 93 seems far more likely).
• Bush II: We must take the war on terrorism to Afghanistan because the Taliban are harboring Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks (never mind that the U.S. government had already planned to invade Afghanistan long before 9/11).

There's all sorts of others too (for too many to name) but another short list: Flouride in the water is good for you; the IPCC (a government agency by the way) says there is a "consensus on Global Warming" but there isn't at all; Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons; the USA is spreading democracy; we are the "good guys;" the Japanese government saying that there was no problem at Fukushima; being the news director of a major Japanese broadcasting station and telling people that SARS, Bird flu and Swine flu were going to kill well over 250 million people worldwide (in total, until today, the three of them together have killed less than 300 people) the list goes on and on... 


These are all the million and one reasons why I am very skeptical about the pronouncements of teachers, scientists and politicians. 

Photoshop did wonders for the Man Made Global Warming movement...

That's why whenever I hear some politician say that they need to tax us to "help the children" or "save the environment" or "stop global climate change;" whenever I hear that we must go to war to stop some country from harming their people (as if bombing those same people is helpful) or that, in the worse case of an Orwellian nightmare, that "We must go to war in order to have peace" I am very skeptical.


I think, in this modern age, we need, we must to have a very strong and healthy skepticism about anything we hear, see or read on the mass media and that includes the Internet.


To do otherwise is to be foolish and completely ignore the historical record.

Big Government is Not the Answer... Government is Our Enemy

I often get complaints from people about my anti-government stance on just about, no make that ALL, everything.

The Roman empire had Caesar, Caligula, Nero, Augustus, etc...

Different presidents, but it was still ultimately the Roman Empire.

The USA has had many presidents.... (Get it?)

Judge Napolitano has written a brilliant expose simple stating why government is the root of our problems and not the solution...


Like I have always said, "If government were benevolent and the answer to all out problems than a big government country like the Soviet Union would have been hugely successful. But they weren't."


The good judge sums it all up in one great sentence: 


"Unlike an individual or a well-run corporation, government is not motivated by how efficient it can be, but rather by how lucrative it can be for those associated with it, and how those who run the government can stay in power." (emphasis mine).


The above is exactly correct. No matter the problem, the government's answer is always to expand upon itself. That is the nature of all government.


Who was in charge when the Twin Towers were attacked? The Bush Administration. Did anyone lose their jobs? No. The government's powers and reach were expanded.


Some will say that the government is here to protect the little guy. Oh really? How's that working out for the now nearly 46 million Americans on Food Stamps? Or the now 25% of all American children in poverty? Has the government cut the Pentagon budget to help pay for these poor people? Nah.


Here's another good one that never ceases to amaze me: "The Civil War: The North went to war with the South to end slavery." Ha! Oh really? Is that why some Northern States still allowed slavery for two years after the war started? And, think about this, since when has the USA ever gone to war to protect the rights of dark-skinned people? Never! Get real if you think we have.... Or do you think we are bringing democracy to those people in the Middle East too? 


Have you never read "War is a Racket"? The USA only goes to war for economic aims. Never to protect minorities.

Here are some more great bits from Judge Napolitano's article:  

Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney don't want to shrink government. They love government. They just want to manage it better. The problem with that approach is that government by its very design is always mismanaged. The centralization of decision-making amplifies the effects of poor decisions while disincentivizing prudent ones.

Unlike an individual or a well-run corporation, government is not motivated by how efficient it can be, but rather by how lucrative it can be for those associated with it, and how those who run the government can stay in power. Someone who was philosophically opposed to government domination of the housing market wouldn't perpetuate it by taking one red penny of taxpayer money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, like the former Speaker did, whether he calls himself a historian or a lobbyist. Someone philosophically opposed to government domination of the health care market would never offer up government as the solution to the problem of the uninsured, like the former governor of Massachusetts did, since the problem of the uninsured was created by government's involvement in the health care market in the first place.

The federal government does not need an efficient manager. That's a pipe dream based on the noble but flawed premise that government can be made to operate as a business. It cannot. Business is subject to the forces of free choice, supply and demand, and competition. Can you imagine government subjecting itself to the forces of competition? Can you imagine government permitting us to ignore it?.... (Read the rest at Lew Rockwell...)   http://lewrockwell.com/napolitano/napolitano34.1.html

NOTE: See this big news just in: 

Michele Bachmann campaign chair and Iowa state senator defects to Ron Paul