Two hundred and eighty-one years ago, the Irish satirist Jonathan Swift proposed a solution to poverty in Ireland.
Referring to his native country, Swift noted, “It is a melancholy object to those who walk through this great town or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads, and cabin doors, crowded with beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags and importuning every passenger for an alms.”
We would not object if you stated Swift’s description of 18th century Ireland bears a striking resemblance to present day America. In fact, we would be forced to declare that it is also “a melancholy object to those who walk through this great” campus! Furthermore, if you were to make such statements, we would impart a similar description of this country — adding a Swiftian proposal of our own.
The American is stricken with anger, laden with grief and burdened with a malady of the hindquarters anytime she opens a daily newspaper. This malady, or pain have you, is both of the figurative and literal type; the perusing of print media is sure to cause many a stomach discomfort.
What is the cause of this Great Flatulence? Why has the proverbial shit hit the proverbial fan?
The reason is simple: There are too many of us — too many patients, too many students, too many in need and too many not, too many insincere, too many unaware and too many saying “there are too many.”
We apologize for burdening the reader with response but how would one solve this acute problem?
The Daily 49er has pondered in this state of perplexity since its establishment. For sixty years we have reported the news and for sixty years we have wrestled with the possibility of nothing to report.
If anyone does find a solution to the “too many” quandary, the world’s problems would simply disappear. In other words, we would be out of a job.
After years of waiting, our editorial board has arrived at a somewhat favorable solution.
We were led to this solution by a man whose name was ironic — for a person of his endowment. He went by Richard, but in writing by Cheney. We note, however, that the irony is in the familiarization of his name, Dick, but we digress.
Dick pointed out that in his search for power and wealth he came across an object he deemed “yummy.” While he had not thought it as a solution to our problem, we were quick to come to this conclusion.
According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, roughly 15 million Americans are unemployed. What if these people never made it passed infancy? Surely, then, Congress would not be bothered with passing legislation to help the unemployed. The problem faced by these Americans would not exist.
The White House states that about 46 million Americans lack health insurance. As reported by NPR, The Kaiser Family Foundation declares that those not insured “tend to be poorer and in worse health” than those who are insured. What if these people never made it passed their first cold or flu? Surely, then, the health care debate would be rendered moot, saving Congress valuable time.
The elimination of the unemployed and the uninsured would solve other problems that plague Americans as well. With a 20 percent decrease in the American population, there would be plenty of room for undocumented immigrants. Republicans and Democrats alike would declare amnesty, sparing Congress the pain of producing viable immigration reform.
Similarly, a lack of population would limit applications to American universities and financial aid. Overcrowded classrooms in primary and secondary schools would also be a thing of the past.
All the problems our society burdens its representatives with would be nonexistent.
When Dick first told us of his peculiar taste we were shocked. We asserted it was cannibalism and that it was wrong to indulge in the flesh of one’s own species. He corrected our errors and opened a door into the world of savoriness.
Dick explained that the average adult toddler is bitter in taste and that this bitterness only progressed as the child ages. Hence, the savoriness of human meat is lost at around 13 months.
He continued to say that eating someone under the age of two is, in fact, not cannibalism, and that it was just an unfavorable vice. He compared it to smoking cigarettes or eating too many donuts. We agreed.
It was after his mention of carcinogens that we came to our conclusion.
In the spirit of the Irishman Swift, we “humbly propose [our] own thoughts, which [we] hope will not be liable to the least objection.”
Everyday around 11,000 people are born in the U.S. If we were to consume approximately 20 percent of those babies we would limit the possibility of unemployed and uninsured Americans.
A daily diet of 2,200 babies would not be too much for approximately 300 million Americans.
No one would be forced to eat their children and Congress would determine the selection process. This process would be a landmark for bipartisanship.
The government would seize the infants and distribute them to willing buyers. The families who lose their newborns will be awarded a large tax credit, stimulating our economy.
Those who purchase the infants would pay an amount no less than $10,000 per pound to the federal government. This payment would be used to pay off our national debt.
The average newborn weighs about 7 pounds, bringing the U.S. federal government a yearly income of about $55 trillion.This may sound repulsive to many but we think it would be a great solution to many of the problems we face to today.
It’s either this or waiting for Congress to figure it out. The choice is yours.