The 'Dissociative Shift Principle'

Todd Witengier
The Dissociative Shift Principle is obligatory wealth transfer through an independent centralized body to recipients of the authority's choosing. Those funding the transfer are necessarily unaware of the subsequent capital distribution and the recipients are unaware of the disbursement's true origins, as the distribution is controlled by the overreaching central body.

In short, the Federal Government usurps the credit for the riches bestowed upon the unwashed masses. Employment of this principle has been demonstrated near countless times in today's society, as it has in generations past.

Politicians, as well as government officials and agencies, capitalize on the dissociated capital transfer to bolster the government's importance to its now indebted recipients, creating a friendly, yet dependent bloc-a vassal class whose allegiance is now ensured through modern serfdom. Our politicians have created and assumed the role of the new American aristocracy.


So, what does this mean for America and the eager participants in this new arrangement? Well, initially it sounds like a great deal. It's a fair conclusion that those who really reap the rewards stemming from government-supplied benefits are those who do not pay taxes. In other words, they are getting government-provided services without having to participate in funding the programs. Yes, as tax payers, we receive some of the benefit, as well, but from a bang for your buck perspective, getting something for nothing will always trump the advantage realized by one who actually pays. As voters, the non-contributing recipients of such benefits will no doubt support such ballot proposals and the politicians who initiate them, essentially spending someone else's money. And since the proportion of tax payers vs. non-tax payers is 43.4%, the bloc of people truly reaping the rewards will no doubt automatically push through any benefit program that they don't have to pay for as there isn't sufficient contention to stop it. Once the proportion shifts numerically favoring non-tax payers, our true rights as tax-paying citizens will be stifled. The tax payer will have no recourse but to accept tax hikes resulting from programs and initiatives that non-tax payers vote through.


We see how the rights of the tax payers are diminishing, but what about the rights of the non-tax paying public? Unbeknown to them, their rights are diminishing, as well. Basically, they are allowing the government to usurp the authority and gain unprecedented control over such things as education and health care, while limiting our potential for economic gain through targeted higher taxes, which abate economic incentive.


Until now, the United States has been successful in relieving itself of a feudal system mentality and aristocratic rule with our victory in the Revolutionary War and subsequent adoption of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, the modern architects of societal re-engineering have adopted aspects of this once rejected form of governance and wealth management in a concerted effort to win the hearts, minds, and now bodies of their hapless constituency.


Todd Witengier

The Dissociative Shift Principle is obligatory wealth transfer through an independent centralized body to recipients of the authority's choosing. Those funding the transfer are necessarily unaware of the subsequent capital distribution and the recipients are unaware of the disbursement's true origins, as the distribution is controlled by the overreaching central body.

In short, the Federal Government usurps the credit for the riches bestowed upon the unwashed masses. Employment of this principle has been demonstrated near countless times in today's society, as it has in generations past.

Politicians, as well as government officials and agencies, capitalize on the dissociated capital transfer to bolster the government's importance to its now indebted recipients, creating a friendly, yet dependent bloc-a vassal class whose allegiance is now ensured through modern serfdom. Our politicians have created and assumed the role of the new American aristocracy.


So, what does this mean for America and the eager participants in this new arrangement? Well, initially it sounds like a great deal. It's a fair conclusion that those who really reap the rewards stemming from government-supplied benefits are those who do not pay taxes. In other words, they are getting government-provided services without having to participate in funding the programs. Yes, as tax payers, we receive some of the benefit, as well, but from a bang for your buck perspective, getting something for nothing will always trump the advantage realized by one who actually pays. As voters, the non-contributing recipients of such benefits will no doubt support such ballot proposals and the politicians who initiate them, essentially spending someone else's money. And since the proportion of tax payers vs. non-tax payers is 43.4%, the bloc of people truly reaping the rewards will no doubt automatically push through any benefit program that they don't have to pay for as there isn't sufficient contention to stop it. Once the proportion shifts numerically favoring non-tax payers, our true rights as tax-paying citizens will be stifled. The tax payer will have no recourse but to accept tax hikes resulting from programs and initiatives that non-tax payers vote through.


We see how the rights of the tax payers are diminishing, but what about the rights of the non-tax paying public? Unbeknown to them, their rights are diminishing, as well. Basically, they are allowing the government to usurp the authority and gain unprecedented control over such things as education and health care, while limiting our potential for economic gain through targeted higher taxes, which abate economic incentive.


Until now, the United States has been successful in relieving itself of a feudal system mentality and aristocratic rule with our victory in the Revolutionary War and subsequent adoption of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, the modern architects of societal re-engineering have adopted aspects of this once rejected form of governance and wealth management in a concerted effort to win the hearts, minds, and now bodies of their hapless constituency.


Todd Witengier