We Can Do This
posted at 1:15 pm on December 5, 2009 by Doctor Zero
President Obama has another speech about the economy lined up, announced at the end of his recent “jobs summit,” from which critics of his policies were pointedly excluded. The summit was attended largely by the architects of the disastrous “stimulus” package, which funneled nearly eight hundred billion dollars into the pockets of preferred Democrat constituencies, but had none of the predicted beneficial effects on the economy. The Democrats are talking about another $300 billion stimulus spending bill. The unemployment rate recent slipped back by 0.2%, but it remains in the double digits, and the number of long-term unemployed actually increased.
We don’t need more speeches, meetings, and reckless deficit spending. It’s time for Democrats to admit the truth – painful to them, exhilarating and a bit frightening to the rest of us: Government can’t fix this. Only the free citizens of the United States can. It’s time for government to get out of the way, and let us get to work.
All these government attempts to stimulate, subsidize, and regulate are bleeding investment capital and consumer spending power from the economy. Government is an inefficient investor, by definition. It follows many criteria beyond efficiency and profit potential when it spends money. The need to reward political allies, and deference to ideological concerns, are likely to play more of a role than increasing “shareholder” value. The government does not earn the money it spends, or secure the backing of investors – it seizes that money from the private sector, or runs up massive debt to be repaid by generations to come. This leaves it with none of the incentives or discipline required for success.
There is one other component of economic growth that is utterly foreign to the government: risk. Politicians risk nothing, beyond slightly diminished chances of re-election, when they shovel billions of taxpayer dollars around. Entrepreneurial success is a contest, which requires the possibility of loss to reward risk-taking. A government that speaks of racking up another $300 billion in debt after the previous $787 billion in spending was a failure is not an entity that accepts risk, and therefore cannot achieve reward.
The creation of jobs requires an expanding economy. The economy expands when investors take risks to meet consumer needs. Government extracts taxes from the population, finances debt with foreign investment, and spends the money to meet constituent demands. In the difference between needs and demands, you will see the difference between growth and stagnation. Successful investing is difficult, and scary. The pursuit of reward, and the energy of inspiration, drive investors to dare the consequences. It is a vocation wholly unsuited to politicians.
A million plans to generate new industries, and increase the demand for jobs, are brewing in the minds of American citizens. Some of those plans will not pan out, while others will succeed brilliantly. The challenge of freedom and capitalism declares that sacrificing the chance for brilliance, to reduce the possibility of failure, is a foolish bargain that leads only to decay. It’s fitting that the President who worships the power of the State more than any of his predecessors speaks of “hope.” An increase in unemployment benefits is something you hope for. Success and growth are things free men and women aspire to.
Political control is the death of aspiration. How can we calculate the risks and rewards of long-term investment, when we know the government can change the rules at any time? Where is the motivation for sacrifice and transcendence, when political support can earn billion-dollar subsidies? How can we focus on our long-term plans, when the government’s future is a core dump of impossible debt and fragile currency? How can we nourish the aspirations of our children, when we know their future is already mortgaged to pay for current spending that failed to produce any of the results we were promised?
A corporate executive who squandered a year of his investors’ income on a failed attempt to fix unemployment would not be rewarded with a new contract, six times as large, to manage health care… especially when a review of his firm showed a century of nothing but costly failures and fraudulent “business plans.“
If Barack Obama truly wanted to help the economy, and reduce unemployment, he would stop giving endless speeches that only reinforce his image as a man who has no idea what he is doing, but is relentlessly determined to do it. He would remove the threat of a cancerous national health care system, rapidly growing to consume an ever-greater share of the economy. He would abandon his view of modern America as a helpless fossil whose life support must be paid with her grandchildren’s credit cards. He would understand that jobs are not benefits, to be given, taken, or created… but rather a commodity, to be bought and sold.
We are the same people who split the atom, defeated the Axis, rebuilt Europe, planted our flag on the Moon, and threw down the Iron Curtain. We stand on the same land that nourished the dreams of our grandfathers with wheat, corn, oil, and coal. We are the authors of a radiant web of knowledge that encircles the world. We are the greatest enemies that War, Famine, Pestilence, and Death have ever faced.
Step aside, Mr. Obama. We can do this.
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Excellent.
Reading this kept me remembering that the Reagan ideal is to get govt. out of the way. The Obama way is to “fix” America by expanding govt., which won’t work.
cs89 on December 5, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Yes, he’s floating a balloon on a second stimulus bill. Of course, it will be the same as the last. It will save only govt. jobs, unionized at that.
In CA, we’re getting buried by the pension/benefits problems with these unions. It won’t matter by the time this is over. I can’t see CA ever recovering, frankly.
We are not allowed to reduce benefits, per courts. And the politicians don’t have the will to reduce future contracts.
It’s throwing money down a rathole out here. No private sector can rebound enough to handle the revenue problems.
AnninCA on December 5, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Never mind that it wasnt exactly free entrepreneurship that did any of that… ;-)
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Probably not the best examples, considering the govt had a lot to do with all of that…
ahhh well.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 1:23 PM
beat me to it…
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 1:23 PM
Who is John Galt?
I’m not going to do anything to put one more dime than absolutely necessary into the Treasury for these looters.
Until the government is changed I’m going to stand aside and let them loot. When it is over I’ll roll up my sleeves and rebuild. Meanwhile I’m preparing for that, but nothing goes into action until the Obots feel the pain they’ve caused the rest of us.
poplicola on December 5, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Yes we can.
TXUS on December 5, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Govt step aside?
Not gonna happen until the Democrats are out of office.
—————————-
Who is John Galt?
I’m not going to do anything to put one more dime than absolutely necessary into the Treasury for these looters.
Until the government is changed I’m going to stand aside and let them loot. When it is over I’ll roll up my sleeves and rebuild. Meanwhile I’m preparing for that, but nothing goes into action until the Obots feel the pain they’ve caused the rest of us.
poplicola on December 5, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Yes, we took early retirement for the same reason. We can reengage at any time or stay out for good. Starve the beast is the only way. The libs want Socialism, let them pay for it.
Meremortal on December 5, 2009 at 1:29 PM
Now had a liberal said the same thing during the Bush years, in protest to his elective Iraq war, would you have called them unamerican?
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 1:30 PM
So the answer to mass outsourcing and offshoring is lower taxes basically? Wow if it was that simple we would have figured it out 50 years ago no?
The Calibur on December 5, 2009 at 1:38 PM
I buy $700 in weed killer and sprinkle it on my lawn. Instead of dying out, the weeds are much worse than before, almost as if the weedkiller is really weed fertilizer…
According to these people, the solution is to spend $300 more in the same weedkiller!
Johnny 100 Pesos on December 5, 2009 at 1:40 PM
Only the dynamo of capitalism could generate the tax revenue to fund those projects. Obamunism is intent on killing the goose that lays those golden eggs.
OhioCoastie on December 5, 2009 at 1:41 PM
But those projects aren’t undertaken because of the profit motive. While much of what Doc says about incentive to grow is true, his allusion to great works of non-profit related enterprise does little to reiterate that point.
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 1:44 PM
And besides, projects like the moon shot and the marshall plan were undertaken during times of much greater tax burden.
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 1:45 PM
You can count on President One Trick Pony to continue his current policies. After all, perception is REALITY, and Democrats perceive that government control and intervention are just what our economy needs.
GarandFan on December 5, 2009 at 1:53 PM
So why don’t you tell us what you think of another stimulus when 1) the first is not even fully implemented and 2) the first is not even working.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 1:58 PM
I noticed our trolls and crr did not quote:
All of this is due to the hard work and attitude that made America. It has nothing to do with the type of Government Mr. Obama brings.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Of course, Boeing, North American Aviation, McDonnell Douglas, IBM, North American, Chrysler, Rocketdyne, and Grumann (all Apollo contractors) were working for free, now weren’t they. All those engineers were paid in celery, not a salary.
Numbskull.
turfmann on December 5, 2009 at 2:00 PM
I did not. There’s a long history of this kind of action in America. Go read Thoreau’s 1849 “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience.” http://www.constitution.org/civ/civildis.htm
“…How does it become a man to behave toward the American government today? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave’s government also.
…
When I meet a government which says to me, “Your money our your life,” why should I be in haste to give it my money? It may be in a great strait, and not know what to do: I cannot help that. It must help itself; do as I do.
…
I have never declined paying the highway tax, because I am as desirous of being a good neighbor as I am of being a bad subject; and as for supporting schools, I am doing my part to educate my fellow countrymen now. It is for no particular item in the tax bill that I refuse to pay it. I simply wish to refuse allegiance to the State, to withdraw and stand aloof from it effectually… In fact, I quietly declare war with the State, after my fashion, though I will still make use and get what advantages of her I can, as is usual in such cases.
…
If we were left solely to the wordy wit of legislators in Congress for our guidance, uncorrected by the seasonable experience and the effectual complaints of the people, America would not long retain her rank among the nations.
…
The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to — for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well — is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it.
…
poplicola on December 5, 2009 at 2:01 PM
As I understand it, there were a lot of loopholes in those old tax codes that made the effective tax rate much lower than the theoretical tax rate.While I agree that the Doc’s examples aren’t necessarily the best for displaying the virtues of a free economy, they do the the effect of setting the bar for what should and shouldn’t be undertaken by government in a collective fashion. Yes, it takes government collective action to defeat the Axis powers, but it doesn’t take it to deliver health care, except in the case of infectious disease, where there is clearly a public health component.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 2:05 PM
They didn’t undertake the projects out of profit motive though. They didn’t all independently get together and decide “for profit, we must go to the moon”.
Here’s where I should probably call you a numbskull, but theres no need to get personal.
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 2:05 PM
A package of budget holdovers and work projects was a giant waste of time, another would be an even bigger waste of time. Doesn’t mean the government has no place in mitigating economic consequences…you know, unemployment insurance, food stamps, and the like. Thats what they should’ve been doing from the start. However, I won’t use this misstep as a means to indict all of government, as Doc does.
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 2:07 PM
And using the stimulus to pay off election supporters is helping the economy.
Keep propping up your fraud of a president.
BuckeyeSam on December 5, 2009 at 2:10 PM
All too often I have seen what food stamps, SSDI, welfare, and unemployment insurance does to people. They serve as a disincentive to hard work and personal responsibility. Now we have gotten to the point where the government extends such benefits unfairly and has taken any embarrassment out of using food stamps (which now are redeemed using a bank type cared). Not to mention the building and rebuilding of roads that are not needed.
So yes for the most part I indict the government as a huge waster of our money.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 2:14 PM
Wow. That’s quite a statement. Now how do you suppose they became involved in the space program exactly? Church meeting? Online dating site, PBS funding drive?
You needn’t worry about calling me a numbskull. I’ve been called ‘numbskull’ by brighter.
turfmann on December 5, 2009 at 2:14 PM
Not only are they paying them off they are paying them to actually go out and campaign ( see ACORN ).
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Great post. The Socialist in Chief will ignore it, of course.
PattyJ on December 5, 2009 at 2:17 PM
I suppose NASA mightve had something to do with it
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 2:19 PM
I’m guessing you read the recent NYT article? Why is not stigmatizing food stamp users a bad thing? Would you prefer people’s family’s suffer because the parent is too embarrassed to use food stamps?
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 2:19 PM
As John Galt says, “Get the hell out of my way.”
Now more than ever the Republicans need to man up and kick these libtards out of D.C.
Mojave Mark on December 5, 2009 at 2:20 PM
No. You had 8 years. You f***** it up. Let the adults handle it now.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 2:23 PM
All this talk about the economy and healthcare is not about helping people, but about control. The Marxists wish to create a permanent majority and have found several crises to exploit in order to do it. Many people are fighting against the policies (and they should), but the real battle is about control. It is likely the Alinskyites at the top view the chatter about the merits of the stimulus and healthcare as a good thing, for it keeps the attention is directed away from their real agenda. We need to start fighting the real battle, the war for control, and keep the message on that.
Doctor Hook on December 5, 2009 at 2:29 PM
for those not in the trenches: my husband sees drug dealers every day (some he puts in jail). they declare no income & pay no taxes yet make alot of money: enough to support several families, houses, cars & employees. and yet this drug dealer can be on food stamps himself as can all his families because there is no identifiable source of income to disclose.
this is why those same food stamp recipients act so haughty when in the grocery store. they know that obama will never cut off their supply of govt money.
because when their moneymaker goes to jail, they’ll keep on with the govt subsistence.
kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 2:30 PM
If by “adults handling it” you mean “take more of your money”, f*ck you. If you’ve got some solutions that don’t end up costing me more, I’m all ears. Otherwise, I’ve got my own bills to pay and I don’t need any more.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM
The moo-saih’s moo has fallen off.
tarpon on December 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM
Actually, most drug dealers make next to nothing. Thats why the vast majority live with their moms.
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 2:39 PM
You have hard time thinking outside of “us vs them”, don’t you? Bush was not a fiscal conservative.
foucaultsvac on December 5, 2009 at 2:40 PM
I’m not trying to take you out of context or put words in your mouth….
But I’m pretty sure you just said the reason food stamp recipients are “haughty” is because they’re drug dealers.
That is a truly amazing perception of reality.
The Calibur on December 5, 2009 at 2:49 PM
veni: you go! i’m tired of supporting the whole world. why is it a crime for me to keep money made by me, my husband or my family?
kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 2:53 PM
I keep having to remind myself that you’re not joking.
Hawkins1701 on December 5, 2009 at 2:53 PM
Someone’s read Freakonomics.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 2:53 PM
calibur: no, they are haughty because they know that they get illegal money when supported by the drug dealer & they know they will be able to continue on the perfectly legal federal subsistence if & when their drug dealer benefactor goes to jail.
let me be clear. these people have no idea in this world of getting a job. ever. they are nothing but parasites.
kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 2:55 PM
ernesto, surely you jest. unless you are in the criminal justice system & see this for yourself, then I tend to disbelieve your statement.
my husband sees it every day.
kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Except that we couldn’t do any of those things (well, maybe with the exception of splitting the atom; that was fairly easy) if it hadn’t been for our strong capitalist economy.
It wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that the Cold War was won on the strength of our economy alone, not military technologies or anything else. And I think Obama is demonstrating rather well where our economy would be without free enterprise.
novakyu on December 5, 2009 at 3:00 PM
ernesto, still reading?
poplicola on December 5, 2009 at 3:00 PM
ok, I’m going to take food to new mother.
ernesto, have a nice day.
kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 3:00 PM
It’s not a crime and these putzes telling you otherwise should get nothing but the back of your hand. Of course the Left doesn’t mind higher taxes. It’s how they earn their living. If an activity requires subsidization through the state, chances are it’s because not enough people would undertake said activity voluntarily. If not enough people would undertake the activity voluntarily, it’s probably because their is no real value in the activity. If there’s no real value in the activity, why bother undertaking it in the first place, when there are plenty of activities that do provide real value?
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Did you not read my post? are you just an idiot? I does not provide incentive for personal responsibility . Grow up and act like an adult. If someone has a legitimate need then why would it be embarrassing anyway?
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Yeh you are an idiot.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 3:02 PM
You were okay with your analysis up to this point.
They did undertake the projects for profit. No, they didn’t “decide to go to the moon.” – But they sure as heck didn’t undertake the projects offered without a profit motive!
Oopsdaisy on December 5, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Even if they make a lot of money, having their residence in their mother’s name provides them with legal cover in case evidence of illegal activities are found on the premises.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 3:02 PM
So the answer to mass outsourcing and offshoring is lower taxes basically? Wow if it was that simple we would have figured it out 50 years ago no?
The Calibur on December 5, 2009 at 1:38 PM
actually, yes, it is that simple. the reason companies outsource and offshore, as you put it, is because of high taxes. high business taxes, high employment taxes, high taxes on raw materials, etc. it’s not hard to figure out, get big government out of the flipping way!
mrfixit on December 5, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Many “live” with their “girlfriends” and put cars in their girlfriends names. So for ernesto or anyone else to think they can get a true read on the income or wealth of drug dealers is far too unbelievable.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 3:05 PM
“Drug dealer” isn’t exactly a 9-5 job, either, so the proper analysis would be their hourly wage, not their total wages. If a drug dealer works 5 hours a week and makes $200 profit, that’s not enough to get his own place, but it’s $40/hour with no taxes.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 3:13 PM
That and whatever government program puts them in pretty good shape.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 3:17 PM
OT: Ernest Rutherford (Kiwi) first split the atom
AsianGirlInTights on December 5, 2009 at 3:17 PM
o.O
Slave wages, horrible working conditions, and environmental degradation have nothing to do with this decision? It’s because of taxes? Talk about static analysis.
The Calibur on December 5, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Two points:
NOT!!
.
2004:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahtuNt3AKCg
2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&feature
And these are examples of YOUR “adults?”
I’ve already shown I disagree with the “Bush was a fiscal conservative.” – But you intimate that the “last eight years” are ALL his fault?
It doesn’t matter – you have a real problem backing your statement with fact.
In January of 2007 – Democrats took control of all of Congress. – I presume you are unaware of who writes the budgets?
Each house of Congress has an Appropriations Committee, divided into subcommittees that control spending in specific areas (agriculture, armed services, homeland security, etc.). Each subcommittee produces an appropriations bill that specifies sums to be spent on each program. Differences in the House and Senate bills are then worked out by a conference committee made up of members of the two appropriation subcommittees. If the final House-Senate bill is passed in both houses, it then goes to the President for signature.
We already know who is responsible for the housing debacle.
So Nancy and her minions took over the House and Harry and his minions took over the Senate in January of 2007. – And these are your adults? – How have things gone since 2008???
Oopsdaisy on December 5, 2009 at 3:21 PM
The Calibur on December 5, 2009 at 3:20 PM
yes, the science is settled, or didnt you get the message??
lol
mrfixit on December 5, 2009 at 3:27 PM
beware the man who decries profit, for it is the lepers bell of the coming looter
ayn rand
mrfixit on December 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
All of those projects were ultimately about “profit”.
Defeating the Axis was profitable in the sense of assuring our survival as a free nation. It was an investment in our future.
The Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe on an economic basis. It was an investment in their economy, it was not a handout, paying Europeans to not work. In the end, Europe became our biggest customer, and we profited from that.
Apollo was profitable for the contractors. It was also profitable for the entire nation in terms of technology. It was not a handout, it was an investment in the future.
The Cold War was also an investment in our future survival as a free nation. As an aside, it was profitable for the defense contractors. That money was not just “spent”, it was invested in productive work.
Handing out billions to unions, ACORN, and the like, is only buying votes. It is not an investment in growing the economy, it does not create any new technology, it does not create any new wealth, it is not an investment in our future prosperity.
And while there is real need and merit to infrastructure investment, it does not create wealth as efficiently as private sector productivity.
ZenDraken on December 5, 2009 at 3:32 PM
ernesto on December 5, 2009 at 2:19 PM
I don’t know about the rest of you but I am becoming alarmed at the precipitous decline in the skills of the trolls that Soros is putting on the streets. Time was when a troll showed up you could engage him or her in some witty reparte, some whimsical notion of politics or economics. No more. Sadly, today’s trolls do not understand the basics of capitalism, though they may loathe it to their core, no they don’t understand what the purpose of a corporation really is.
I suggest we send a letter to Mr. Soros explaining our concerns. I would recommend a certification curriculum for them. They really need to become much more effective in their trolling. Once certified, they could put the reqisite alphabet soup of letters after their screen name to let the world see that they take their trolling seriously. I would like to suggest they be referred to as Soros High-efficiency Internet Trolls. Now, once they have been certified, let’s start rewarding them through a corporate style hierarchy. Once a certified troll has mastered the fine art, he can be promoted to head troll. A little meritocracy never hurt anyone, did it? Just think, trolls can let us know how highly regarded they are within their own ranks by announcing that they are, indeed, a Soros High-efficiency Internet Troll (head).
turfmann on December 5, 2009 at 3:41 PM
ernesto and crr6, congratulating yourselves mightily – the money has to first be produced…where the heck does the gov’t get it from?
Schadenfreude on December 5, 2009 at 3:41 PM
I am seeing roads rebuilt that do not need rebuilt. I am seeing new roads that are not needed. Most of this spending is a joke.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 3:41 PM
All real adults of the world are indignant. Such kindergarten was never in charge, ever. The headmaster is an underdeveloped narcissistic fool. Gibbs is his mouthpiece, Rahm is his tank. The media are his stimulators. The world is laughing at us more than they ever did, while telling fools like you and yours that they ‘love’ us like never before. Wake up.
Schadenfreude on December 5, 2009 at 3:48 PM
These two do not belong in the same category.
Ernesto is intellectually honest and has good manners, even if we disagree with him.
AsianGirlInTights on December 5, 2009 at 3:51 PM
Good question though.
AsianGirlInTights on December 5, 2009 at 3:52 PM
Maybe you guys should go into the business together then. Veni probably doesn’t have a job considering he mentioned the other day he was a history major in college.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Dull Minds Think Alike…
You two turds miss the point, as always: Government does have a legitimate place and purpose but government can also BE the problem. We are in a government-created mess which can only be rectified by government drawing back and letting private enterprise revive a failing economy. Obama’s recurring failures prove this point
Doc Z was talking about the capacity of the American people to solve crises and achieve Great Ends. Sometimes government is the proper vehicle to use, but this this case–where the problem is government-created and the size and spending of government only makes the situation worse–government needs to withdraw
You two clowns, Dumb & Dumber, like to think you’re clever and jump on something which is not there: You can’t understand anything beyond slogans and talking points, so you pounce like the eager little fairies you are, making fools of yourselves again and again
Janos Hunyadi on December 5, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Ernesto may be dumb sometimes, but he is HOT!
crr6 is useless waste.
AsianGirlInTights on December 5, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Please don’t compare crr6 to Ernesto. Crr6 is a paid Axelturd troll. Ernesto is a young conservative in training.
Knucklehead on December 5, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Come on, ernesto just needs some encouragement…..
crr6 is trolling the zoo for a date……
Definitely different, cutie!
HornetSting on December 5, 2009 at 4:23 PM
Doc Zero is correct. To that I will add Bozo is completely clueless. He’s never been forced to actually go out and work to earn an income. Neither have 92% of those surrounding him.
They have no grasp of well, anything in reality. Its laughable in the extreme to refer to these people as adults.
How can they fix a machine they don’t know anything about? TO illustrate, ask yourself, could Obama fix your car? your television? Your PC? No, he could not, he lacks the fundamental and practical knowledge experience and skill to do those jobs.
He lacks the toolbox to fix the economy too and rather than even try he just wants to try to talk it away, but that is neither adult nor useful.
We all know, as John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and George Bush did that cutting taxes and cultivating a hospitable environment for private enterprise will bear the fruit of a healthy prosperous economy. They took the correct steps to foster that environment. People went back to work.
dogsoldier on December 5, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Ernesto is not a troll…he’s actually providing you a valuable opportunity. You get the chance to present an intelligent response to his statements and questions, and ask for the same from him.
Too bad you had to resort to name calling. Think that makes you the winner?
ladyingray on December 5, 2009 at 4:33 PM
I was a history major. Then I got my MBA from a top 5 business school. Believe me, if we ever happen to work for the same company, I’ll be either your boss or your boss’ boss.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Lol…you really do believe in unicorns and fairy tales, don’t you?
You don’t know the difference between rabbit turds and rice crispies. We had at the very least 6 good years under Bush with the last two featuring a Democrat controlled Congress and a President that abandoned the free market to ‘save it’. The current Beta in Chief has doubled down on those very same Bush policies and put us into crippling debt for the foreseeable future with no jobs created or saved.
8 years…8 years…8 years…Get another slogan, dimwit. We were much better off than we are right now or will be for the next 3 years for most of the Bush presidency.
Go look it up…stop repeating stuff you hear at the commune every day…it’s simply not true.
Asher on December 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM
I’d say Ernesto is more of a libertarian coming in from the Left side of the aisle originally, but that’s just a guess. At any rate, he’s not a troll.
crr6 is simplesimon’s belly warmer and that’s about it.
Asher on December 5, 2009 at 4:40 PM
CRR- so you don’t think drug dealers are not on the public dole? Please.
—
Asiansgirl- you know ernesto goes both ways. Make sure you use protection
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Sure you did sweetie. After all, why would you lie?
No need to be defensive about being a history major. Some of those 5 page papers are hard.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 6:15 PM
Believe what you will, it doesn’t change the facts. I know that in your social circles, the idea of someone not sitting around on their *ss waiting for the government to make their life better is a foreign concept, so I can understand the skepticism.
And, since I studied Greek and Roman history and thus had to know Ancient Greek and Latin before I wrote a paper of any length, yeah, it was pretty hard. You try translating Sophocles’ choral odes to write a paper on the concept of Justice in “Antigone” and let me know how far you get.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 6:49 PM
Folks, just remember the ‘Wisdom’ of crr6:
Who would do a better job of spending that money?
The individuals that earned it?
Or a government that seizes it at the point of a gun and uses it to buy votes?
Remember, to a Statist like crr6, our earnings are somehow automatically the property of the government.
Property with which they can use in whatever manner they choose.
Juno77 on December 5, 2009 at 7:13 PM
1. “our 8 years” was 6; Nancy and Harry took power in 2006.
2. It would be interesting to see the proof of “adulthood” you offer for the current administration: would it be:
A. Rampant, unchecked spending?
B. A nearly complete absense of campaign pledges having been kept?
C. Disastrous political appointments?
None look adult to me.
massrighty on December 5, 2009 at 7:47 PM
I think crr6 is talking about the “paradox of thrift” concept. The problem with that is that sometimes paying off debt is the highest-return option a person has. If I’ve got credit card debt at 15% and my options are to pay it off or spend it on an item that will give me less value than retiring the debt will, the government has no right to force me to forgo a tax cut to enable it to spend that dollar I could have put toward cutting my 15% interest rate. Plus, if the government’s return on that tax dollar, properly-measured, is less than 15%, all things being equal, it’s destroyed wealth. Right now, the household sector needs to rebuild the asset side of its balance sheet and reduce the liabilities side. The government refuses to let us do that because they know that if we do, unemployment will stay high, tax revenues will plummet and government workers paychecks and pensions will be at risk and many of the debts owed to the government’s banker cronies will have to be written off as uncollectible.
The “paradox of thrift” also has a flip-side that the Keynesians don’t seem to understand, call it the “paradox of profligacy” or something, and it’s at the base of the series of bubbles the US has been in since the 1990s. It’s when everyone thinks the good times will never end and spends like there’s no tomorrow, including taking on debt beyond their true long-term debt-servicing capacity. Then, when the last marginal consumer has acquired the last marginal dollar of debt, thinking that it won’t be a problem to service that debt in the future, the good times come to an end and people are left with tons of debt they can’t pay back. All the crr6′s of the world are doing is saying that, even though all the other credit cards are maxed out, because there’s still some available credit left on the last credit card in the house, i.e. the government’s, that we should use it rather than take the pain of paying off the other trillions of dollars in debt that we have.
If it works, great, but generally, it’s insane on the same level that betting your entire life savings on one throw of the roulette wheel is insane.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Some people ‘May’ pay off debt or whatever, but the larger point is that they should have that option.
crr6′s talked as though the government has the first claim on that money and that they should decide how it’s spent.
That is the philosophy of the Statist, the philosophy that presupposes that all property is “Collectively” owned by society – in the form of government.
That type of system has been proved to be a failure some many times, it’s not even funny any more.
Juno77 on December 5, 2009 at 8:04 PM
100% agree. Individuals know what their highest-payoff use for their income is and since they earn the income, do have the right to make that choice. It’s clearly a government infringement upon a person to force that person to fund deficit spending the government decides is necessary, while that same person would rather pay off their credit card debt, which consumers clearly want to pay down, if you look at the consumer credit trends of the last 6 months. It’s indefensible to argue otherwise.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 8:19 PM
Oh, so this will be the speech in front of the fireplace, Obowma wearing the red sweater preaching to us to “do as I say, not as I do” and claim we are in an economic malaise.
Deja vu all over again.
dthorny on December 5, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Not for much longer.
The unthinkable is almost at hand: the majority of citizens having not enough resources to effect a recovery.
Think about it. You can’t help the economy if your ‘career’ consists of chasing after min-wage-slavery junk jobs until you’re physically unable to work. For the vast majority of Americans, opening an independent business is simply not an option anymore. Who can compete with the big chain stores for groceries and consumer goods? Who can compete with robotized mass production?
Either we start on the road to recovery darn quick or we could all be looking at the fate of a dead atheist: all dressed up and no place to go!
Dark-Star on December 5, 2009 at 9:10 PM
I agree.
People should consider that the money that comes into a household isn’t and cannot be ‘tasked’ to specific things.
If you get an extra $1000 and use it to pay off debt, that also means that there is a $1000 somewhere else In the family budget that you didn’t need to pay interest, etc.
That’s means $1000 that can be used to buy groceries, gas or anything else to spur the economy, as they say, It’s all Good!
This gives some insight into the mindset of the Statists.
Statists believe in the supremacy of the Government, Conservatives believe in the supremacy of the individual.
Juno77 on December 5, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Both posts make excellent points.
I’m also amazed how often the psychological impact of debt reduction (on a family budget level) is overlooked.
In many cases, paying down a revolving debt (such as a credit card, or a car loan) early, can build a sense of confidence.
This confidence often translates into a feeling of being free to buy more of something (building a larger deck onto the back of your house, for example,) or of buying something that you might not have (getting that new PC before the old one craps out.)
Even money spent on debt service can be stimulative.
Bottom line – money best resides with the people who earned it.
massrighty on December 5, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Actually I’m in law school, and within the social circles here we consider going to business school roughly equivalent to “sitting around on your ass”.
Ahhh B-School. Spend 60k to get the same entry level sales job you could’ve gotten straight out of undergrad…
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 10:13 PM
Damn! I wish I could write like that.
Krumhorn on December 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM
Dude…
+7%!
Seven Percent Solution on December 5, 2009 at 10:23 PM
That’s a pretty Manichean view, even for a conservative. The fact that we believe government action is necessary to assuage certain macro-level problems (like say…the greatest recession in 80 years) hardly means we believe in the “supremacy” of the government. Don’t project your own dogmatism onto me.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 10:23 PM
Some of them yeah. They’re called taxes, and they’ve been around for quite awhile. I’m not sure, but I believe they existed under Bush as well.
Seriously man, you need to get out more. The argument I was making in that thread is a basic Keynesian concept. As I said, the fact that you’re so shocked by it says quite a bit about your own ignorance.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 10:28 PM
Law school is for math-challenged p*ssies. I’m sure you fit right in.
Unless you’re at a top-tier school, if you think that law degree’s going to have a positive ROI, you’re f*cking dreaming.
There are a lot of junk b-schools with limited post-graduation options, although there are even more junk law schools, since there’s a glut of lawyers in general, but, generally speaking, there are 7 business schools where every top-tier company across all industries will recruit (HBS, Wharton, Stanford, Northwestern, U Chicago, MIT, Dartmouth) in almost any economic environment, because that’s where they get their future senior executives from. You can be sure that none of us graduating from those schools were taking entry-level sales jobs for 60K.
Unless you’re at one of the law school equivalents, I doubt you’re going to have even half as many doors open to you as I had coming out of b-school. And it only took me two, instead of three, years of lost income.
venividivici on December 5, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Our objection is not to taxes, per se; but to the assumption that they are automatic, and, in some way “owed” to the government.
Further, when we see waste, fraud, and abuse, we rail against the portion of our confiscated income that funds it.
And yes, we well remember that taxes existing during the Bush presidency.
We also recall that he cut them.
massrighty on December 5, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Announcement:
On Monday Morning President Obama will be announcing the first of his….FIVE-YEAR PLANS.
Oh JOY!!!
Sapwolf on December 5, 2009 at 11:05 PM
I’m sorry but this is just moronic. Your receive all sorts of tangible benefits for your taxes in the form of police and fire protection, schooling, road maintenance etc. in return for your taxes, not to mention the intangible benefit of living in an actual stable, structured society as opposed to some sort of pre-historic state of nature. If you received similar benefits from any sort of private institution you’d have no problem saying you “owe” them money, but because it’s the big bad government you have to maintain the obligatory air of disdain and skepticism, no matter how ridiculous it is under the circumstances.
Terrific. No arguments here.
Hey that’s all well and good but that has little to do with what Juno said. He (she?) appears to be saying that simply because I think it’s a bad idea to cut taxes during a recession, I must think all personal income is automatically the property of the state. Nutso.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 11:19 PM
I’m sure you were quite the math whiz, Mr. History major. Anyway, the math you guys do isn’t that difficult. There are a few J.D. MBA students in my section and they’re always going on about what a joke B-school is in comparison. To be fair I do think it depends to a certain degree on your own skill-set, but all in all you and I both know that law school is much more demanding.
Yep and yep. Anyone who goes to a Tier 3 (or even Tier 2) school in this economy is nuts.
I do go to a Tier 1 school, and if you think you had more doors open then I will you’re f****** dreaming. Any law student can take a management position right out of school, in fact a lot of the 3L’s I know that just graduated used the job listings from our university’s B-school in their job search, and they got many of the top positions (ahead of the B-school grads). Plain and simple: Law school grads can practice business if they so desire. Business school grads can’t practice law.
crr6 on December 5, 2009 at 11:29 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »