Question for everyone to answer.

Here is the question I have for all people to ask themselves. Would you forgo immediate positives and endure short term pain for long term prosperity?

This question hits on a lot of fronts for me on a personal and political level. I am always looking long term and what is best. I typically spend like a "Jew" (with a last name like Berman go figure right lol) finding the best deals and only buying needs not always wants. I save my money and live beneath my means. Why you may ask and it is to be better off in the future. I was laid off from my job back in December 2008 and took a huge cut in pay, but because of saving and already living under my means we really did not feel it that much because we spent the same, slightly less during that time and saved just a little bit less. If we were in debt and spending out of control previous to that point that situation could have stuck us in bankruptcy.

Now my question is why does our government support the opposite? Grocery list of examples.... After 9/11 they wanted us to give up freedoms short term to fight "terrorism" with the un Patriot act for the long term good. What happened here we gave up freedoms on a bill that was written in 1999 two years before 9/11 that is now being used for domestic survellance of law abiding citizens and law breaking drug dealers not terrorism at all. We lost short term and long term with this Unconstitutional act passed by congress. Next the bail out of the banks who cut themselves a blank check signed by us the taxpayers. The government rewarded short and long term bad investments (some of which was promoted by idiots like Barney Frank in the case of fannie and freddie mac loaning big money to low income people to "promote equality") by the banks with giving them a blank check saying hey make all the dumb moves you want because we will print enough money for you to stay afloat.

Our government wastes money left and right of tax payers money and the printing presses go on non stop for both long term and short term pain that we will all feel. Is it one side of the aisle or the other to blame? Yes all of the above. We need to get the government to spend within their means without printing more money to create more means. People who want to give money to the poor should do just that. The people of this country are great and need to take it upon themselves to help one another out. It is the Churches of this great country who need to step up to the plate and help its people out. It is not the governments role to take my money that I worked for and give it to someone else. For every dollar it takes in for this purpose only 30 cents is given to the people who need it anyways. They want to tax everyone more and more except for the poor who don't pay any tax and wonder why the poor do not get good jobs. Simple those who have money to pay people to work for them are paying too much taxes to hire extra workers. Bringing congress within the constitution and removing the federal reserve who tries to control the markets will be a great step forward in bringing taxes down and banks into better self regulation without the fallback support of the federal reserve.