With each war, our commitment to diversity increased as we needed warm bodies to replace the dead or fight the war in the first place. By the time WW2 ended, America had committed itself to having lots of warm bodies, and to that end, began abolishing segregation in the 1950s.
At the same time, it swung hard to the Left with a social welfare system that started as soon as Ike yapped about the “military-industrial complex.” That gave the neurotics a talking point, namely that we should starve the military-industrial complex by giving money to the poor and diversity instead.
In the mid-1960s, as Lyndon Baines Johnson continued leave a swathe of collateral damage across American history, more of the FDR-style social welfare state programs kicked in, and somehow American wages stalled almost instantly. The extra taxes ate up all of the extra money, and companies paid less to workers and hired fewer.
The state fired back by bringing women into the workforce, doubling the workforce, which cut wages further. Then the Hart-Celler Act kicked in, flooding the country with new cheap labor. The American Dream died then but it took a few decades to really catch up with the workers.
Now we see how the “eat the rich” rhetoric of the past few years has been based on a lie, namely the accusation that capitalism did this. In reality, diversity killed the American Dream by further shattering the value of wages and ensuring that job-workers would own nothing and like it:
But when wages started to stagnate in 1970 — and continued to do so as immigration expanded the labor pool — the economic fruits had to go somewhere. They gushed into executive compensation, financial parasites like hedge funds and private equity firms, and lawyers.
In order to keep the anti-poverty social safety net and the pro-diversity programs running, government must tax every level of the system and, in doing so, has paralyzed it. American prosperity died the instant diversity hit, but it has been getting worse as illegal aliens stream into the country to use up even more resources.
For a long time, government kept the scam going by spending recklessly and taking on debt through bond sales to fund this process. However, this too has its limits, and despite enriching many people who made investments in the bond market, this has devalued the currency because there is too much of it floating around.
Think of it this way: if your farm was worth a pound of gold, and you issued a hundred notes, each would be one percent of a pound. Go up to ten thousand notes and each is worth a percent of a percent. Now issue a million notes based not on the pound of gold alone, but the value of your debt, and the actual value of each note shrinks further.
Not surprisingly, this forced the Fed to raise interest rates in order to reduce the amount of money readily available, but this did not address the devaluation problem, only compressed the economy further. Desperate for good news, they are claiming a raise in wealth on a false basis:
Rising home and stock prices that far outpaced inflation helped support the net worth increases. The rise in wealth was broad based across demographic and socioeconomic groups, in part reflecting the greater likelihood of middle and lower-income households to own stocks and homes last year than in 2019, Fed economists said.
Median income, before taxes and adjusted for inflation, rose a modest 3%, from 2018 to 2021. The rise in incomes came during the pandemic, which caused unusual economic disruptions and large government stimulus.
Yes, the prices of stocks and homes went up, but because the value of the currency went down, no one actually got richer. They got higher numbers though, so they can take on more debt and possibly leverage more capital, but they can in fact buy less.
We are told that “inflation” — really currency devaluation, driven by the need for more money to buy the same thing, not more demand for money on top of what was already being put into the economy — was only 17%, but more likely, as during the 0bama years, the currency lost a third of its value.
This follows the Carter plan of dropping in European-style social benefits and Communist-style diversity programs, following whatever the intellectuals at The New York Times like, and then realizing later that this demoralized the nation and reduced the value of the currency.
Without diversity programs, none of this would be possible. The voters demanding this stuff are mostly the diversity, and they are numerous enough to hold the swing vote in every election. The programs exist to fund the diversity. They enrich those vested in the system, but impoverish everyone else. Regime Change is coming.