All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 31, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:13
December 31, 2008, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
That is absolutely right, uh Johnny Donovan, and we're pushing back the frontiers of ignorance, and this is again Walter Williams sitting in for the vacation rush limbaugh.
Tomorrow Mark Stein will be on, and then Monday Rush comes back.
But you can be on with us at 800-282-2882.
Now, here's my question.
I wrote a syndicated column, oh, let's see, uh early uh, I guess November, early November.
And the title of it was Evil Concealed by Money.
Now here's my question to you.
Imagine there's an elderly widow down the street.
Uh she has neither the strength to mow her lawn or enough money to hire someone to do it.
Now here's my question to you, and I'm almost afraid of an answer.
Would you support a government mandate that forces one of your neighbors to go mow the law lady's lawn each week?
And if he failed to show up and mow her lawn, would you approve of some kind of punishment ranging from house arrests, fines, and imprisonment?
Now I'm hoping that the average American would condemn such a government mandate because it would be a form of slavery.
And what is the essence of slavery?
It's the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.
Now, I think we're kind of clear on that.
Would there be the same condemnation if instead of the government forcing the person to actually go down and physically mow the lawn if the government and instead the government forced the guy to give the lady $40 out of his weekly pay to have somebody to be able to hire somebody to mow the lawn?
Would you be would you uh be satisfied with that?
I would say that there's little difference between the two mandates.
That is both forcibly use one person to serve the purpose of another.
Now, probably most Americans would have a clearer conscience if all the neighbors were forced to put money in a government pot, and the government would send a weekly sum of $40 so that lady could hire somebody to mow the lawn.
Now, this mechanism is uh makes the visit the victim invisible, but it's still the same thing.
The forcible use of one person to serve the purpose of another.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is why socialism is evil.
That is, it employs evil means, namely coercion or the taking of property to accomplish what are seen as good goals, namely helping your fellow man.
I don't disagree.
I think helping one's fellow man is a good goal.
But if you employ evil to reach that goal, I think it's it's not it's it's unworthy.
That is, as I said earlier in the show, reaching into your own pockets to help your fellow man in need is is laudable.
Reaching in somebody else's pocketbook is despicable.
Now some people might contend, oh well, Williams, look, we're a democracy where majority agrees to forcibly use one person.
Well, I would well, first of all, I would tell the person we're the framers did not intend for us to be a democracy.
They intended for us to be republic.
And if you don't believe me, I mean, do we pledge allegiance to the flag for the democracy for witches?
Or do we sing the battle hymn Of the democracy, no, it's a battle hymn of the republic.
Now, but however, a majority rule does not establish morality.
That is just because the majority decides to do something doesn't make it moral.
And so I believe that a large part of the nation's problems today are result from our straying away from the moral from from uh morality, and also it's straying away from the Constitution.
That is, the Constitution represents our rules of the game.
And yes, as Thomas Paine said, government under the best of circumstances is a necessary evil under the worst of circumstances an intolerable one.
So we do need some government.
I'm not talking about anarchy.
What do we need government to do?
What should be the essential function of government?
The essential function of government in a the essential legitimate function of government is to stop one person from using force against another person when that person has not used force against him.
That is the uh moral function or the legitimate function of government is to protect you and I from having from violations of our private property.
Now I don't just think I'm when I say private property, I'm not talking about your car, only your car, your house.
I'm talking about you.
You are your private property.
That is, you belong to yourself, and I belong to myself.
I am private property, and that's the role of government.
That's the legitimate role of government in a free society.
But it turns out that government today is the major violator of private property.
And so we're going we're going to have these big problems so long as we ignore these moral values that were the underpinning of our nation, and so long as we ignore the United States Constitution, which are our rules of the game.
Now, you'll get some crackpot lawyer or some crackpot legal scholar saying, Oh, well, the sky Williams, he's kind of very narrow uh interpretation of the Constitution because we have a living constitution.
The Constitution is a living document.
Well, anybody tells you the Constitution is a living document, he's telling you we don't have a Constitution.
Because for the rules of the game to mean anything, they must be fixed.
How many of you, for example, would like to play me poker and the rules be living?
That is, maybe my two pair can beat your full house depending on the circumstances.
So again, I'm repeating that there are two major problems that I think that I think the two major areas that r lie at the core of any problem, and I challenge anyone to uh to show me anything different.
That is, if you point out a major problem in our country today, I can show you that it is a result of our straying from the United States Constitution, or it is a result of our engaging in immoral behavior, namely taking the property of one person and giving it to another, or giving one American a favor that will be denied another American.
And we can talk more about this after the break.
We're back, uh Walter Williams sitting in.
Before we go to the phones, uh my colleague uh Thomas Sowell, he writes some brilliant columns.
And I just want to comment, kind of go through a list of uh one that he's or go through some of the items and one that he's it's titled Postponing Reality.
And he says, some of us, he begins with pointing out that some of us were raised to believe that reality is inescapable.
Uh but that shows just how far we are behind the times.
And he said today reality is optional.
At the very least it can be postponed.
And he starts off by saying kids in school not learning, no problem.
Just propose just uh promote them to next grade and call it compassion.
Uh can't meet college standards.
Denounce those standards as arbitrary barriers to uh keep out the underprivileged.
Can't do math or science after they're in college.
Denounce those courses for their rigidity and insensitivity.
We see this.
Umce they're out in the real world with diplomas, but no real education.
Well, at least the day of reckoning has been postponed for fifty for fifteen years.
Now here's what we're talking about today.
Uh the current bailout extravaganza is applying the postponement of reality democratically to the rich as well as the poor, to the irresponsible as well as the responsible.
We're told that big three automakers in Detroit would have repercussions across the country.
So let's postpone reality for them.
That's Thomas Sowell has done some really brilliant writing.
Matter of fact, I think he's on his 36th book.
Uh and I think it's classic books.
I think it's worthwhile reading.
One is called Basic Economics and one is called Applied Economics.
But uh this is a very, very good column, and you find it uh I it was December 17th in the Jewish World Review.
And that's what we Americans do.
That's what we want in school.
That is we you know, we want to postpone reality, and postponing reality does not hide reality.
It just makes you less able to face reality.
Let's go to the phones to John in Brownfells, Texas.
Welcome to the show.
Well, it's actually New Bronze right outside at San Antonio where I first heard you on the uh WAI Carl Wigglesworth show.
Oh, yeah, yeah, years ago, yeah.
I've been enjoying your uh uh efforts and it's good to hear that you're at the plate still swinging and slugging away.
Oh yeah, I'm gonna hang in there and I'm gonna I'm gonna hang in there until I'm a hundred and seven.
Me too.
Okay.
I had uh maybe this is a little off point, but your analogy of uh uh mowing the the elderly lady's lawn and uh the fact that that is a form of slavery.
Uh was wondering how does the military draft fit in that.
Of course we don't have it now, but it's embedded into my life because I was drafted and it's uh hanging around the corner.
So I wouldn't even call it a draft.
I do not call it a draft as a euphemism for what is actually confiscation of labor services.
That's what it is.
That is lay you know, back in nineteen fifty-nine, I was driving a taxicab in Philadelphia and I I was making about four hundred dollars a month, and that was good money back then.
And I got a letter which essentially said, Williams, you're gonna stop making four hundred dollars a month and begin to make sixty-eight dollars a month.
And by being in our army, and they said if you don't make us happy, we're gonna put you in jail.
You don't come to the army.
And I think that the uh the the draft is a uh is is is again it's forcibly using one person to serve the purpose of another.
And I think it's immoral.
And I think that if we have to fight wars, we should uh do it with uh volunteer.
Now by the way, you point out that we no longer have a draft, but people have to register for the draft, don't they?
They certainly do, it's waiting in the wings.
And I I'd be worried about that.
I'd I'd be just as worried if someone said, Well, Williams, we're never gonna have slavery again, but we want you to sign up.
I mean no but I I'd be worried about that, wouldn't you?
Uh yes, sir.
Well, thank thanks calling.
Let's go to uh Richard in San Francisco.
Welcome to the show.
Yes, hello, Walter.
And uh I'd like to wish you a happy new year to you and your family.
Well, thank you.
Thank you very much.
And uh I I wanted to call and respond to the uh soldier that's going to Fort Campbell and to think about the bailout of the uh the UAW and their pension this way.
When he joined the service, he knows that if he signs up for twenty years, he gets a retirement.
And all those people that work there for years and years, they went to the retirement with the understanding they would have this pension.
And now when everybody talks about the pension and how it's dragging down the big three, I think that uh it's not uh it's it's not a good thing.
And in and as a soldier, he can think about the twenty-year retirement and see how he would like it if someone came back at him and said that hey, your retirement, uh, we want to take it from you.
Well, I I don't I don't know whether they're talking about taking it.
I mean, it's a pension is a contract.
And so what one can talk about is look, you made some stupid pension agreements.
That is you made some uh unsustainable pension agreements.
That's I think that's what they're talking about.
I don't I don't I don't know whether they're talking about taking them away from people who have already established those contracts.
Perhaps they're talking the people are continuing to work for uh GM.
Maybe they're talking about renegotiating and and you know, doing some horse training.
I don't know whether they're talking about saying we're gonna cancel uh your pensions.
But but you know uh the the big problem, the big issue is the the uh the national pension program calls Social Security.
How come nobody's worried about that?
Well, I am worried about that.
I I don't know.
That is the disaster in the wings.
Absolutely right.
And so uh but thanks a lot for calling in.
Let's go to uh John in Stockholm, New Jersey.
Welcome to the show, John.
Hi.
Um I I was listening earlier and uh you brought up something regarding uh government spending in James Madison.
Yeah.
And how two thirds of our government spending is uh spent on things that are uh unconstitutional.
Yes.
So I I was just wondering how we can put an end to that.
Well the I was thinking about um even with uh you know different uh uh agencies within the government.
I mean a lot of them are not provided for in the Constitution.
Uh that's absolutely right.
And y I I think uh now I'm not a legal scholar, but I think that no one in United States has standing in court to force the government to obey the United States Constitution.
Okay.
I don't think anyone does.
Right.
Okay.
I uh I at some time ago, this is during the eighties, and I uh Ron Paul, uh he's congressman from Texas, he brought suit in the uh in the Federal District Court uh for an uncon unconstitutional act by Congress.
That is I I think that the uh the TEFRA or some big tax act uh originated in the Senate.
And according to the Constitution, taxes, uh tax laws supposed to originate in the House of Representatives, and he brought suit and the court told him he didn't have any standing.
Okay.
And he is a congressman, does not have standing to force the Congress to obey the United States Constitution.
Right.
Okay.
So and so there's the question, well, do Americans even want uh uh obedience to the United States Constitution.
Do you think they do?
Uh I I don't think a majority of Americans do, but I I do, I sure do.
And that's why I listen to programs like this.
Uh it just seems like we're just uh h helpless subjects to the uh to the government then.
I mean it's so different than you know, living under uh monarchy or any other, you know, tyranny.
Well, we well, we're moving in that w we're moving in that direction.
Okay.
Uh I you know, it's rather remarkable that the founders of our nation, they went to war with the mightiest nation in the world, namely the United Kingdom, because uh one of the one of the major reasons is that they did not want to work for King George from January first and May to January fifteenth.
Now here we Americans, we are working to pay federal, state, and local taxes from January first until the first of May.
And what does that mean?
It means that we're going on five months out of the year and we do not have the rights to decide how the fruits of our labor will be used.
Somebody else makes that decision.
Now keep in mind that a working definition of slavery is that you work twelve months out of the year and you do not have a right to decide how the fruits of your labor will be used.
And we're moving in that direction.
Uh, Milton Friedman, uh my uh longtime friend now deceased, uh very eminent economist, he said that I'm understating it because if you include the regulatory burden on Americans, that is the cost of regulations, the average American works from January first to July something to pay for all the services that he gets from government.
And he said, he always said, we all ought to be thankful that we don't get as much government as we pay for.
We'll be back with more of your calls after this.
Well, folks, it's the uh last half hour of the show for this year.
But we'll be back next year and the year after that.
But let me just tell you, folks, uh, before we get back to phones, give you a quotation by Thomas Jefferson, and and I feel compelled to tell you these things, folks, because if I don't tell them tell you you're going to spend the rest of your lives not knowing it, unless you check on my website.
Here's a quote from Thomas Jefferson.
Because I know soon as you talk to some of your friends, they'll say that Williams guy is crazy about what's in the Constitution because the Constitution says that the government is supposed to promote the general welfare.
Well, here's what Thomas Jefferson said about the general welfare.
It says Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.
Jefferson and I mean uh Madison and others said roughly the same thing.
So when anybody talks about the general welfare, just remind them of what Thomas Jefferson said.
And if you forget, just go to Walter E. Williams dot com and you can see those quotes.
Plus, for you ladies, you'll see a handsome photograph at that site as well.
But let's go to Mark in Newport News, Virginia.
That's what a matter of fact, that's where my grandmother was born and raised Newport News.
Welcome to the show, Mark.
Hey, Professor Williams.
Yes, how are you?
Good.
Good to talk to you.
I'm glad I was off today.
I get to hear you more than I normally would have.
So quite a quite a treat.
But um I was getting back to you on the uh the lady with the grass getting cut.
Yeah.
And I wrote to you soon after it came out in the uh in the in the editorials about that.
And you know, some houses in a neighborhood are worth more than others.
And um the whole neighborhood goes down if uh one house can't get their get their uh grass cut, can't be kept up properly.
So far, you're right.
So so those would stand to get hurt more than um than than the other houses.
So now once we've decided that we're gonna tax everybody.
Well, you know, wait, wait, wait, you you missed a step there.
I know I know I did.
I figured you were gonna catch me on that one.
You're a pretty good professor.
No, but you know, it it brings up the question, you know, just how much of this country does belong to the general public, and how much belongs to those who have invested in in the in the uh means of production themselves.
You know, does any part of the country belong to the general public?
And if you wait well, I guess you have to make the uh distinction between private property and public property.
Exactly.
My private property, I would assume that it belongs to me.
That's right.
That is right.
Now, see, that's simple.
I can understand that, but how much of me belongs to somebody else, that's complicated.
Well, but as as as poor a job as our monetary system does of um, you know, keeping value, so to speak.
Yeah.
Um and you talked about before the purpose of government is to defend us against somebody that would bully us around.
And and the government's the main person bullying us around.
Well, well, but the boss of the person who has capital is able to bully around those who doesn't.
Oh, no, no, no.
You don't think so?
That is wrong.
Yeah, for example, Bill Gates is the richest person in the world.
I mean, he has sixty billion dollars worth of assets.
Now you tell me what Bill Gates can make you do.
Oh, well, he can't.
I mean, can't can he can he force your children to go to a school that you don't want them to go to?
Well, let's let's take Warren Buffett.
He's a better example because he can diversify into many different uh, you know, aspects of the economy.
But if every one of them that he diversified, if he's able to diversify enough, you know, the theory is that one of them will produce and the other one doesn't.
Well, Mark, no, no, no, I'm asking a more basic question.
I'm saying, what can Bill Gates or Warren Buffett these these are two richest people in the United States, I think they both have assets around sixty billion dollars.
What can they make you do?
What can they make Mark do?
Well, they can monopolize something that I have to have.
They could like what I mean uh again like um a communication tool that that that works.
No, no, no, no.
And everybody uses the same tool.
I think you're reaching, but but here's my point.
Bill Gates and Warren Buffett do not have as much power over you as some GS fifteen or some clerk at the City Hall in Newport News.
A clerk, a clerk in the City Hall at Newport News can mess up your life in ways that Bill Gates and Warren Buffett can't.
Yeah.
Well, I I understand that.
I I wasn't getting at the relative concept.
I was getting at the absolute concept.
And maybe somebody uh affect us at all.
Well, that's what that's what I'm pointing out.
That in a free like in a free society that is wealth, I mean a power is very, very distributed.
I mean it's it's it's very weak.
There's not huge concentrations of power.
Now, Bill Gates and rich people, they can make you do things, but they must get permission from the United States Congress.
That is, they can rip you off, but the Congress has to enable them to do that.
And so all I'm saying to you is that Congress and the politicians and the leftists can get us to focus away from the really coercive aspects of our government by getting us to focus on the rich people.
I've often said that I wish there was a humane way of getting rid of rich people so that we could get down to what's in the best interest of the ninety-nine, forty-four, one hundred percent of the rest of us.
Yeah, it's that's what we need to worry about.
It would be called practical antitrust law.
Well, and and by the way, I'm gonna let you go at this, but by the way, if you see monopolies and other uh uh uh forms of restraints of trade, they exist at the hands of government.
That is government, for example, let's say in the sugar industry, government uh, of course, with generous contributions from the sugar uh lobby in the United States, government keeps out foreign sugar so they can charge so that the domestic producers can charge you and you and me higher prices.
That's how and and so that is a restraint of trade, but you need government.
Matter of fact, most of the agencies in Washington, Department of Labor, Department of Congress, Department of Agriculture, and other departments, their major function is the promotion of collusions and cartels in the restraint of trade.
And I'll tell you, one way to identify you have to take my class and actually look at read the book.
Pick up Liberty versus the tyranny of socialism, and I give you some lectures in there about how to identify a collusion, a seller collusion.
Just look for a minimum price.
Whenever you find a legally mandated minimum price for selling anything, I don't care whether it's a w minimum wages or minimum prices of cotton or minimum price of a sugar, you know that you have a seller's collusion.
And the only way that you can have a seller's collusion is with government support, and we'll be back with more of your calls after this.
We're back, and it's uh Walter Williams closing at the uh EIB year uh year for uh Rush Limbaugh.
And uh in case I don't have time to tell you, um I wish you on behalf of the of all the EIB people uh a happy new year, and I hope it's prosperous, and you better be here tomorrow because Mark Stein is going to be here, and next week uh Rush will be back.
But for uh now let's go to the phones to Pat in Orlando, Florida.
Welcome to the show, Pat.
Well, thanks for taking my call.
Uh I wanted to ask, what is a true conservative economic conservative supposed to do when a Republican Treasury department sends all the money to take away moral hazard from the invest supposedly capitalist investment banks uh and investment houses on Wall Street.
What what hope is there?
Well, it it it it doesn't seem to be a lot, but uh however you know that uh there's connection between the uh Treasury and Wall Street.
And so what might think but while what you just said a little while ago what we have done is now we have delayed consequences.
Oh that's absolutely right.
That's absolutely right.
Or another way of putting it we've delayed consequences and we've spread it among the American people.
We've spread it among the American taxpayers and there's no justification for doing that.
Well I uh I agree and I I just wish that more could be done from the conservative side public radio et cetera to point out the collusion that you're talking about basically between the Treasury Department and the big uh Wall Street bank.
Well well look I I think that what we're doing you you know when you mentioned conservatives or Republicans I think that what do what we ignore is that we cannot change our country by trying to change the people involved that is by saying oh we're gonna put this group of people in we're gonna put that group of people in.
What we have to do is uh write the rules of the game so that everybody will have incentives to behave as according to the rules of the game.
That is soon as we ignore the Constitution that we're in trouble.
I don't care whether you have Democrats in there or Republicans in there.
We're in trouble because we've ignored the Constitution.
Exactly it's not just a Republican uh just a Democrat issue which I don't like it's also the Republicans that have uh really undermined uh our currency and the Treasury department what they're doing.
You're absolutely right and I frequently said that that if you look at the Democrats and liberals if they want to take your money and my money and give it to poor people in cities.
Conservatives and often re and Republicans they want to take your money and my money and give it to banks and farmers.
They both agree on taking our money but they just disagree on what to use it for.
Well thank that is very true Walt and I appreciate it being stated so that people can be aware of uh you know it's not just the Democrats and poor people it's the rich that are s are profiting by the socialized system.
In fact it may even be the modus operandi to socialism what's going on between the Treasury department and the investment bank.
Yes you have and and matter of fact a person can only become Secretary of Treasury if he pleases the pe the investment community.
A person can only become Secretary of agriculture if he pleases the farmers.
So we have to get out of the business of government being able to do what it wants and what it wants what what uh do two and four people we'll be back with your calls after this we're back and it's the last segment of the year but but uh before we close up shop let's go to Tim and Raleigh North Carolina.
Welcome show Tim Dr. Williams.
Okay.
Uh I think you let one slide by a little earlier when there was a comparison made between the retire retirement benefits uh UAW workers and soldiers Oh well they uh are you talking about the magnitude they differ.
Uh yeah they differ but it's not just the retirement benefits.
I mean this guy was comparing he kept talking about the soldiers and how the soldiers should realize you know the commitment was there.
There's also the 20 years of salary difference the 20 years of benefit difference the 20 years of work conditions difference.
He was comparing uh a 2008 Lincoln to a 1974 Dodge pickup.
He he may very well have done it but I I don't have an appreciation for the magnitude so I didn't call him on that particular point but I'm glad that you brought it up.
Thanks a lot let's go to Estelle.
Welcome to show Estelle.
Hi Dr. Williams a pleasure talking to you.
You didn't talk about Mrs. Williams this year to make me laugh.
Well uh it's i actually it turns out uh uh I know you don't know but uh it's nothing to uh make you laugh um uh last December twenty ninth uh Mrs. Williams passed away.
Uh oh I'm so I know uh uh we had been married uh forty eight years and uh fifty years uh together all together.
Oh my God.
And um uh it was it was a it was uh you know the first couple of uh months uh I couldn't get through a day without tears, but now it's getting better.
But fortunately, uh Mrs. Williams left me with a very lovely daughter.
She lives in Los Angeles and she's been home seven times uh s in the uh interval, and she says that uh she's coming home a lot uh to take care of her aging father, which I don't all go along with that much, you know.
I'm of course aging.
But uh Mrs. Williams uh uh and right now I'm kind of over it uh a lot, but not completely, and I and my thoughts today turn to the fact that um we we've accomplished so much.
Um when we started out when we moved to uh Los Angeles in nineteen uh sixty-one, we had seven hundred dollars between us.
Wow and and we had a uh my nineteen fifty-one Mercury and pulling uh four by six U-Haulit trailer uh and it wasn't even full with all of our worldly possessions in it, and uh and we made it from that point uh to uh being very, very well off as we uh as we were.
So I look at our accomplishments and I and I mentioned some of those you can in the acknowledgments uh in my new book uh if you uh care to get it um what's the name of your new book?
It's called Liberty versus the Tyranny of Socialism, and if you forget it, just go to my website.
It's Walter E. Williams.com and all the way at the bottom uh I have it listed there.
You can just click on it and uh and and uh and order it uh from Hoover Institution and it only costs about fifteen bucks.
I'm so sorry again.
I I I just my heart's breaking for you and your daughter.
Yeah, I I had um well, you know, Mrs. Williams uh she would not want uh uh she was a very unpretentious person, and matter of fact, she uh always uh she made me promise that she there would be no funeral, no big announcements, and what she wanted uh uh the thirty-five years that we were in this house together,
uh said mo has been the most happy years of her happiest years of her life, and she told me to uh uh when she died uh to cremate her and spread around the property and uh so that she'd always be there.
Oh and so it's a it's uh um uh I I understand and I thank you for your your concern.
It's been a um a wonderful marriage and uh it worked out very well.
And I would say that we had a whole lot of help uh from many people uh along the way because nobody goes from poverty to affluence without some people uh on the side uh giving them help.
But but thanks a lot, uh Stelle for calling.
God bless you and your daughter.
And thank you very much, and thank uh all of you out there.
Well, this has been a very, very trying year.
But a lot of people are concerned about um the new president.
But here's what I tell people.
The first order business for most presidents is when they get into office, they seek to appease their enemies by sacrificing their friends and wind up not appeasing their enemies and losing their friends.
And I'm quite sure Obama has lost all of his extreme left wing friends.
So just watch that next year.
And at the same time, tune in and rush will get us started for two is it two thousand nine that follows two thousand eight?
Yeah, okay.
▲
Export Selection