November 15, 2012

Explaining The Fiscal Cliff

Well, the 2012 presidential election is now officially behind us, which means Americans are once again united in agreement about everything. That's the beauty of the U.S. election cycle: one day, its neighbor against neighbor in a battle of who has the most election placards in their yard; and after the election, we're all just generally disappointed in ourselves for falling for the election hype AGAIN.

U.S. elections are the equivalent of sitting through "Star Wars: Episode I" over and over into perpetuity, hoping against hope that it won't be as bad as the last time, but it ALWAYS IS THAT BAD.

Unfortunately, almost as soon as the election was over, Americans were informed, as a nation, we're headed for a "fiscal cliff," which sounds pretty awful. I mean, wouldn't it be more pleasing to be told we're headed for a "fiscal meadow" or a "fiscal Nirvana?"

Anyway--because I have an insatiable thirst for knowledge--upon hearing America was headed for a "fiscal cliff," I immediately turned to the Internet, where everything is true.

It turns out, according to the Internet, the "fiscal cliff" refers to the looming financial effect a bunch of existing and impending laws will have on America in the coming years. For the purposes of background information, "laws" are rules absentmindedly passed by elected legislators that inevitably come chock full of what's referred to as "unintended consequences." Often, an unintended consequence becomes so dire it requires its very own name, such as, oh, for example. . . off the top of my head. . . "FISCAL CLIFF."

Now, legislators--in their infinite elected wisdom--almost inevitably respond to a dire unintended consequence warranting its own name via the time-honored exercise of throwing money at it. Oh, sure, they'll give lip-service to such things as "spending cuts," but they mostly do that so we Americans can enjoy a good laugh right before a tax increase, which is absolutely necessary in order for legislators to adequately arm themselves with enough money to throw at the dire unintended consequence--in this case, the "fiscal cliff."

Most rational people, when confronted by a cliff of any kind, tend to change direction to avoid going off the edge. But our elected legislators, God bless them, are poised to take the "Thelma & Louise" approach to cliff jumping, except they're planning on chucking handfuls of cash out of the convertible as it goes over the edge. This is what they refer to as "governing."

Hey, it's what we elect them for, after all.

It's time, once again, to play "Your Tax Dollars At Work!" OK, this is actually the first time we've ever played this game, as far as I know, and I don't know very far. But, let's just go with this, all right?

This installment of "Your Tax Dollars At Work!" is brought to us by a Jan. 10 article from "The Washington Examiner," which informs us a $100,000 federal grant is helping fund the release of "A new video game featuring a black alien female superhero delivered to Earth to fight global warming. . . "

Now, there's A LOT packed into that sentence. That sentence requires more double-takes than a 30 car pile-up. You can keep looking at that sentence and think to yourself "NO WAY DID I JUST READ THAT!" But, you did, so let's examine it more closely, shall we?

First off, can you think of a better waste of superhero powers than choosing to fight global warming? Forget genocidal third world despots laying waste to their populations. No, let's use our super-human abilities to combat a one degree Celsius rise in ocean temperatures.

"Look! UP IN THE SKY! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's. . . a black alien female superhero descending in an elevator to requisition Congress with a bill calling for a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions over the next 30 years!"

For that matter, considering it's a video game, can you imagine anything more boring than memorizing a controller macro that convenes a committee to consider a resolution to think about maybe, possibly, but not really doing anything?

Also, why does the superhero have to be an alien delivered to our planet? What kind of busybody alien superhero has the time to tinker with earth's climate? Actually, I looked further into the video game's back story and learned the superhero is "a warrior woman and inhabitant of Earth’s sister planet, (who) comes to Earth to investigate why it is causing her native planet to freeze and slowly die. . . (She) discovers that the auras of Earth’s women are diminishing."

Anyone who honestly believes the auras of earth's women are diminishing has never gotten into an argument with my wife. Earth women auras are perfectly intact, believe me.

And, no, I'm not making any of this up. We, the American taxpayers, have ponied up $100,000 for this.

Admittedly, $100,000 is a mere pittance when it comes to governmental wasting of taxpayer money. I mean, there are bus stops in Rochester that cost taxpayers $300,000 each, and there was enough taxpayer money just lying around to pay for SEVERAL of those.

Come to think of it, once this video game is released, it should be projected onto screens at the back of all those bus stops, and people sitting in those bus stops should be able to to play the game while they await their buses.

Just think about it: people sitting around, playing games, wasting taxpayer money, pretending to combat problems.

Just like Congress.

Posted by Ryan at November 15, 2012 11:30 AM | TrackBack


Posted by: amyleblanc at November 27, 2012 10:37 PM
StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!