The future of America, as seen in England

  For those who have been keeping up with the affairs across the pond in merry old England, you’re probably aware that things in the mother country have not been pleasant as of late.
  If you are just now tuning in, the United Kingdom has been experiencing extremely violent riots that can only be compared with what happened in Los Angeles in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King verdict. Youthful thugs have been engaging in arsons, lootings and other violent acts on the streets of London and other UK cities.  Footage on the evening news has shown a stunning portrait of a society gone very wrong; youths who look like everyday young people running amuck, kicking in store windows, robbing complete strangers—and all while the unarmed police stand by helpless.
  Yes, I said unarmed police.  Police in England—according to news reports– do not carry guns.  In this liberal mother of the civilized world, only the criminals have guns.  But that’s a whole ‘nuther rant for another time.
   Americans should study these riots in England.  Normally, I’m not one to pay attention to foreign affairs other than just taking a passing glance.  But this news is different because it paints a picture of what could happen right here in our own backyard—and soon.
  So what is it that makes a series of English riots so important?  It is the same common thread that should also interest us in the uprisings in Greece earlier this year.
  In each instance of anarchy, the suspects are the young who are angry because of entitlement reforms.  In case this phrase is new to you, I am speaking of the concept that the government exists to take care of us in lean times, whether they be of our making or not.  The talking heads on television refer to this idea as the “nanny state.”
  Can’t find a job?  That’s ok.  Shucks, it’s too hard to try, so why bother? Sit back and draw a check.
  Just don’t want to work?  Still ok.  Sit back and draw a check.
  Want to live your life on your terms, have children with multiple partners without ever being married?  Want to snort anything up your nose that will fit?  That’s ok, too.  Sit back and draw a check.  We’re here to serve you and certainly, we won’t judge you.
  It has been attributed to Thomas Jefferson that a government large enough to take care of your every need is also big enough to deprive you of the same and more.  We don’t know if the gentleman from Monticello actually uttered those words, but they are certainly true.
  Many years ago, in the days before the Great Depression, those who could not work had to hope that  someone would take care of them.  Churches and charities managed to care for some, but many slipped through the cracks and quite literally starved to death.  It’s hard to imagine that could happen in America, but history records that it did occur.
  Because of these unfortunate circumstances, a system was established in the past century to care for those who were unable to tend to themselves such as the sick, the aged and others who were down on their luck.  We believe that these ones should be seen to by the government.  However, today we would venture to say that a high percentage of those drawing a government check are those who are simply refusing to work, milking the system down to its last drop.
  In Greece and in England, there were so many on the welfare rolls that the national governments began to flounder—much like what we are seeing in America.  In Greece, reform very nearly came too late, for that country had to simply cut off the money quite suddenly and drastically, triggering national riots among those who believed they were entitled to a check, healthy or not.  In England, the newly-elected conservative government also began reigning in the purse strings.  All of a sudden, youth who were used to living on the public teat found themselves being refused and told to work for their living. 
  The idea!  The horror!  Get a job?  Pay bills with money I earn?  Government can’t do that to me! After all, what are all these other people paying taxes for anyway if not to support me?  And so, they take to the streets to vent their frustration and pick up a few items along the way.  One woman was quoted as she bashed in a business window that she was getting her tax money back.
  Right now, noise over entitlement reform—a conservative notion—can be heard all over Washington.     Liberals insist that cradle to grave entitlements must exist.  Conservatives seem to be united in the belief that cuts simply must be made.  We don’t know every argument that is being advanced, but we strongly believe that if you are young, able-bodied and fortunate enough to find work, that’s what you should be doing.  In other words, if you simply refuse to work, I don’t want my tax money going to feed you.  I’ll feed your kids, but not you.
  We’re not economic strategists nor do we have at our disposal all the latest numbers, but it is our contention that if we are to get serious about solving our nation’s debt crisis, we should look to cut back in many ways, chief among them in the areas of welfare and foreign aid.  Frankly, we’re tired of a government that pays prostitutes in China to stop drinking and funds classes to instruct homosexual Africans to clean their privates after intercourse.  And we’re tired of paying able-bodied persons to sit on their ever-expanding rears day in and day out.
   You read it here first, though.  Cuts will be made to entitlements at some point.  We’re too far in debt for it not to happen in some fashion. But look for riots in major cities when the first of the month rolls around and the checks don’t appear in the mailboxes.
  But it’ll all be Bush’s fault, of course.