The reason I say that all these accidents and fires that we see tragically destroying people’s lives and even killing them are acts of terror is that some admissions must be made before the situation can be corrected.  Trump is disrupting a lot of government workers with terminations, and D.O.G.E. is going to cut into a lot of sacred cows, and there is a percentage of those employees who will imply terrorism to the system they control to force the world to see things their way.  For instance, whenever there are air traffic control accidents, the sentiment is to slow everything down and pander the workload to the worker’s feelings, not to make the worker step up to the job’s demands.  To protect this subconscious contract, regulators come up with more rules of conduct that keep the focus off personal performance and instead slow the world down to the weaknesses of the workforce.  In the case of all these airplane accidents, as has been the case in the past, a premise of safety first will force everything to slow down and encourage a population to throw money and more employees at the problem to deal with the compliance aspects of bad regulation rather than challenge the premise of them.  And if people complain, all federal employees will go slower, just like at your local BMV.  This attitude has flowed essentially down into every regulatory environment, from restaurants to tire making, and it’s a big problem.  The reason we have so much waste in government and way too many employees that can easily be removed is that we have allowed radicalism to rule over our labor without the expectation of good performance being a factor in any way.  Instead, our focus has been to make all jobs equal for all people. We have allowed these people to use regulations to hide dysfunction, and that is where we find ourselves today.

I have vast experience in this kind of thing; I have seen every type of ugly thing that human beings can do to each other.  I watch the Davos meetings every year, and this time, of course, all the talk was about Trump and his concept of deregulation to get the American economy moving again, which had them in a panic.  Many forces have been using regulation to artificially stop the American economy so globalism could sink in and empower other countries, such as China, to overtake it.  So whether people die in plane crashes or have their homes destroyed by fire, rules and regulations have been hiding for a pretty long time the true intentions of radical, socialized labor sponsored by an increasingly large government.  And the more that Trump’s administration proposes to cut federal workers and to get rid of ten regulations for every new one created, the more accidents will happen, and much more damage to private property will occur because terrorism is baked into the system.  So, to answer your question, dear reader, are some of these workers that radical? Would they kill their fellow human beings by short-staffing an air traffic control tower?  Yes.  Would they use technology to take vehicle systems over to cause life-taking accidents?  Yes.  Would they purposely start wildfires and destroy entire neighborhoods with arson?  You bet they would.  They will do anything and everything if they have the power to do it, and they will hide their crimes behind do-gooder rules and regulations that put the burden of proof on the compliance side of all business, leaving the provocateurs free to conduct devastating mischief.   This is how we ended up with the completely useless TSA after all, and if you tried to get rid of that unionized menace now, you would undoubtedly see an uptick in domestic terrorism involving airplanes, planned and perpetrated by them.

How do I know?  I could tell you many stories, dear reader, that would make your skin crawl.  However, one easy one comes to mind: I was involved with a rag-tag group of investors and treasure hunters to open a business that involved changing the use of a current location.  Keep in mind that I was in my mid-twenties and learning a lot.  But these lessons would last a lifetime.  I had to hire an engineer for this project to build a fire escape and a few other items that would require a drawing involving this “change of use,” so there were HVAC systems, handicapped accessibility ramps, plumbing, lighting, all kinds of compliance elements that were taking the cost of the project out of the range of the investors, so I had to push back and challenge all these crazy rules.  Because it was a simple business that didn’t need millions of dollars.  But to be compliant, the system required vast amounts of money to throw at the trolls.  I told the engineer and several lawyers that we wouldn’t spend 30K on a new air conditioning unit. And we were not going to do a 100K staircase for a third-floor building.  And we wouldn’t spend 20K on a new handicapped accessibility elevator.  We would challenge all those rules in court and with the Cincinnati Building Commission at City Hall.  Well, the engineer got mad; he was friends with all the CBC guys, and they were used to jacking up the price on entrepreneurs to milk the system for all the money they could get.  The scope of this project’s total budget was only 20K, so the numbers were way off.  However, the engineer and all the lawyers involved were upset that I wanted to bypass the system they had set up.

Long story short, I was involved with other people in this thing and it was a miserable experience that ruined a lot of lives in the process.  We ended up firing the engineer, and I essentially took over his job and all the legal work. It was the hardest thing I ever had to do to deal with those people.  I found loopholes in their giant regulatory book, which was 3000 pages long, and we got our change of use permit without all those extra costs that the engineer proposed.  It was challenging, and when we overcame all the objections the CBC guys had about our project, they laughed and moved the project along.  They knew and could have told us how to move the project forward.  But we had to figure it out or throw money at the problems through the expert class.  I ended up in court representing myself as legal counsel for the next two years, and it caused me all kinds of horrible trouble.  But we did get the permit at a significant cost.  I would say that for every federal job eliminated, there will be that level of trouble that will stick its head out of the sand, and the Trump administration will have to fight all of them in court.  It’s as bad and worse than you can imagine.  I would see much worse radicalism over the next three decades, and all the rules that come out of the compliance culture are every bit as horrendous and a real drag on any business enterprise.  Rules by themselves can make a project good if they are well thought out, and that’s what Trump means by saying that for every regulation created, you have to get rid of ten.  That doesn’t mean we have a worse society that is dangerous.  But we write rules better and do not impose them just to empower a radicalized workforce to nonproductive efforts and to be terrorists to the free market system.  Which they currently are.  And yes, they will kill and destroy anybody who gets in their way to preserve their power.  When you see an accident, do not assume, when it comes to federal employees and other government workers, that there isn’t an element of terror behind it.  Because there probably is.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707