BlueCarp

<img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/4099162-5178672596966869503?l=www.bluecarp.com' alt='' [...] '>

Today’s Denver Post Newspeak

The Denver Post has a front page article today on the city’s “Gang Reduction Initiative of Denver,” or GRID.

 The papers says GRID “is funded by a $2.2 million grant from the Department of Justice.”  This is Newspeak designed to make the federal government, via the Department of Justice, appear to be a benevolent, kind entity.

A more accurate and truthful sentence would say that GRID “is funded by the federal government borrowing money your great grandchildren must pay back.”

Are they “grants” or “subsidies?” Newspeak is so hard to understand sometimes.

I am confused. (Not an unusual state for me, I realize). In today’s Denver Post, Allison Sherry has an article on the potential for Colorado farmers to lose direct payments from the federal government. (See “Farms warm to subsidy cuts“). She writes:

Colorado farmers stand to lose millions of dollars a year in direct subsidy payments for corn, wheat and soybean crops as part of agriculture reform heading to the U.S. Senate in a couple of months.

Colorado received more than $4 billion in subsidies, including direct payments, from 1995 to 2010.

Why are payments to farmers “subsidies” and payments to solar energy companies “grants?” It’s so hard to keep up with the changes in Newspeak.

They are both direct payments from the federal government to private entities. Of course, the federal government does not actually have this money. They borrow it. Sooner or later, the debt will be paid – one way or another.

No matter what you call it, this government borrowing to give money to preferred groups will come from the pockets of future generations. It is intergenerational theft.

It is time we call it what it really is: immoral.