Thought For The Day
*
The longer an elected official remains in the swamp of Washington, D.C., the farther he drifts from mainstream Americans. Recycle Congress in 2010 - No exceptions
How Can the U.S. Economy Recover Without Manufacturing Capacity?
"You can't put people to work in American factories that don't exist."
The strength of the federal economic stimulus package is seriously diluted by the fact that many of the manufactured goods that will be purchased for the attempted recovery must be imported from outside the United States. America simply doesn't make lots of things, anymore. That means many billions of dollars that folks assumed would go towards fueling an American economic comeback, will instead provide work and paychecks to employees in other countries, that still have manufacturing bases. That's fine with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is dominated by large multinational corporations - the same guys that began stripping the United States of manufacturing jobs decades ago.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce was one of the main lobbyists opposed to provisions that would have mandated that stimulus money go to U.S. companies. The Chamber is a U.S. organization in name only, like its finance capital comrades, the guys that gave the world such a bad case of the dreaded "American Disease," much of the planet is praying that cash-rich China will eventually bail everybody out.
The United States' lack of a manufacturing capacity makes it even less likely that anything resembling a lasting recovery can emerge from President Obama's approach to the economic crisis. The infrastructure projects that are supposed to be central to the recovery scheme are only valued at $150 billion - which is not much of a jolt, especially when much of what will have to be bought is only available in other countries, made by foreign workers. Barack Obama has put a huge emphasis on building a green economy. However, according to the New York Times, most of the sources of solar panels and wind turbines are located in Europe and Asia. There can be no green economy without a mass transit makeover of the United States, but the U.S. hasn't made subway and light rail cars in many years. They'd have to be imported.
Every product that must be imported for the infrastructure project means a watering down of the stimulus impact of the dollars spent. You can't put people to work in American factories that don't exist.
A true national recovery effort would mean re-industrialization, on a grand scale and a green model, through massive direct federal creation of state-owned industries independent of the finance capitalists who murdered American manufacturing and then blew up their own businesses on Wall Street. But this is already nearly impossible, since President Obama is committed to saving the banking class through unlimited infusions of public money, and then allowing these reborn zombies to resume their roles as lords of development. The bankster parasites have neither the capacity nor the intention to build anything other than mountains of debt for the rest of us. Therefore, Obama's partnership with them spells doom for national recovery.
Like Billy Preston said, "Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'. "The U.S. cannot create the conditions for economic health without rebuilding a manufacturing capacity. And the remnants of Wall Street have nothing to contribute to an economic recovery, but an infinite capacity to steal.
By Glen Ford
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article9109.html
Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).
On 25 February 2009, Andrei Illarionov testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The hearing was titled “From Competition to Collaboration: Strengthening the U.S.-Russia Relationship.” Illarionov is a Russian citizen presently employed by the Cato Institute. He began his testimony with a brief explanation: “For a number of years I worked at different posts in the Russian government and Administration of the Russian President.” According to Illarionov the Russian regime is a KGB regime, and the United States policy toward this regime is worse than appeasement. It is best characterized as retreat.
Since the collapse of the USSR all American efforts to improve relations with Russia have come to nothing, says Illarionov, and new initiatives from President Obama are doomed; this is because the Americans fail to recognize the nature of the Russian regime.
There is an unwillingness to grasp “the internal logic and intentions of the Russian leadership.” It seems that the free world is unable to deal with powerful authoritarian regimes. In order to deal with Russia, certain facts must be admitted. First, Russia is not a democracy, the Russian people are not free, and the “central place in the Russian political system is occupied by the Corporation of the secret police.”
The secret police of Russia compose a brotherhood, and a system of order. This brotherhood, says Illarionov, is highly disciplined and enforces loyalty with “the ultimate penalty.” They readily use violence against others, and are ruthless in the pursuit of power. They dominate and bully ordinary Russians, who cannot oppose them. They dominate the state apparatus, holding 77 percent of the top 1,016 government positions. There is virtually no independent mass media in Russia, and the level of anti-U.S. propaganda is greater now than in Soviet times.
Even more frightening, the Russian government has killed tens of thousands people, jailing dissidents on trumped-up charges, arranging terrorist “events” to advance its agenda. Many journalists and independent-minded politicians have been assassinated. The Kremlin also threatens its neighbors using energy exports as weapons of coercion, actively engaging in cyber warfare. The Russian invasion of Georgia last August, says Illarionov, was prepared “at least since February 2003.”
The secret police are supreme in Russia. With regard to previous police states, the ruling party or dictator held absolute authority. But the Russian secret police are themselves in control – answering to no one. “The political regime in today’s Russia is therefore quite unique,” noted Illarionov, “since so far there was probably no country in world history … where a secret police organization [captured] all political, administrative, military, economic, financial, and media powers.” This also gives the regime staying power. Since elections are rigged, no opposition can ever take control of the government.
Unless the supremacy of the Russian secret police is acknowledged and understood, the United States will not be able to deal with the regime in Moscow. According to Illarionov, the American side has retreated “on almost all” bilateral issues. If the Americans are alarmed by any development in Russia, whether it is the violation of human rights or the muzzling of the mass media, the Kremlin simply suggests that the Americans shut up and mind their own business. The West has refused to penalize or confront Russia’s destructive behavior. “There were no sanctions whatsoever for any behavior of the Russian authorities,” noted Illarionov. “The recent suggestion ‘to reset the button’ in U.S.-Russia relations and ‘to start over with a blank slate’ is met with poorly hidden joy and satisfaction on the part of the Russian Chekists.”
The KGB regime now believes the American side is acquiescing to Moscow’s assertion of hegemony over the former Soviet space. “It is a surrender of the hopes and efforts of the Russian democrats as well as peoples of the post-Soviet states who dreamed to get out of the system that controlled and tortured them for almost a century,” said Illarionov. “But it is even more. It is a clear manifestation to all democratic and liberal forces in Russia and in the other post-Soviet states that on all internal and external issues of their struggle … the United States now abandons them and takes the position of their deadly adversaries and enemies. And therefore it is an open invitation for new adventures by the Russian Chekists’ regime….”
As if to scold the U.S. Congress itself, Illarionov noted that the Committee hearings were dedicated to “collaboration” with the secret police of Russia. According to Illarionov, “the term chosen for the agents of the U.S. administration’s policy … is ‘collaborationists.’ Collaboration between the two governments today could only be on the Russian regime’s terms and for fulfillment of the Russian government’s goals.” The United States, in effect, has chosen something worse than appeasement. It has chosen the path of outright surrender. “We know the consequences of the collaborationist policy,” warned Illarionov. “Those who retreat and surrender will not get peace, but war – war with unpredictable and nasty results.” The situation is reaching critical mass. The United States is no longer a superpower in terms of its thinking. It no longer opposes totalitarianism. A time of troubles is approaching. “When the world gets there,” said Illarionov, “we need to remember that we had a warning.”
Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).
The 'Chattering Class' is Tired, Broke, and Pissed
Here it comes. Obama is asking Congress to increase taxes on the very people who spur economic and job growth. He’s proposing to increase the top marginal rate to 39.6% from the current 35%. To add insult to injury, he also wants to reduce the amount of eligible tax deductions for the same payers who would be affected by the tax increase. This is nothing more than tax and spend Socialism and you should be outraged. Margaret Thatcher said, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."
First, consider this. If you or your family earn more than $92,000 per year, (and many do, but would scoff at being called affluent especially in the Northeast), then congratulations. You belong to a select group of taxpayers in the top 20% of all wage earners. You also have the blessed distinction of paying 80% of all taxes collected. The top 20% pay 80% of ALL the tax. Nice, huh? Moreover, the top 50% wage earners pay a staggering 97% of all taxes. This means that the bottom 50% of all tax filers pay only 3% of all taxes collected. Put another way, 5 of every 10 people pay only $3 out of every $100 in tax collected. Sounds like a deal to me. For them.
To make matters worse, the Tax foundation verified that 32% of all tax returns filed were from people who paid no federal income tax at all. How is this possible? This is possible because of tax exemptions and earned income tax credits which reduce some filer's tax liability to zero, so 32 % pay nothing. And now Obama wants the people who do all the heavy lifting to lift even more. The fact is the Dems essentially want to REDUCE taxes on those who already pay a disproportionately small amount and provide more handouts to those who already pay nothing or next to nothing in an effort and build support, and yes, dependency in the Democratic voting base, many of whom are here illegally. And this is being done at the expense of responsible tax payers and business owners who have been and continue to be the source of the vast majority of tax revenue and are the very people who make it possible to grow the economy through private sector investment and job creation.
Obama plans on taking more money from the heavy lifters by not extending the Bush tax cuts enacted in 2000. I’m not a Bush apologist. He abandoned core conservative principles and all fiscal responsibility early on, was a failure in many ways, and is largely responsible for Dems having so much power today. However, the Dems have repeatedly slammed the Bush Administration saying that his tax cuts were only for the corporations and the wealthy. This is simply not true. According to IRS income statistics, in 2000 before the Bush tax cuts, the top 10% wage earners paid 67% of all tax. Last year this number was close to 71%. So during a period of time when Bush was supposedly taking care of his buddies in big oil, the highest earners actually paid more tax than before. How could this be possible if the tax cuts were for the privileged few? I never saw this announced on MSNBC or Meet the Press. What Obama and the liberal Dems seem to miss is that when you lower taxes, people tend to put more effort into earning income since less of it is taxable. When you raise taxes, people tend to put less effort into earning income since more of it is taxable, and more effort into finding ways to avoid paying tax. And the latter is not good for anyone. Try explaining that to a liberal.
It’s clear how to stimulate the economy, it’s been proven. The Dems want to ignore that even Kennedy in the ‘60s achieved this by using methods unheard of by some in his party. He cut marginal tax rates, capital gains, and inheritance taxes, and by 1968 that increased our revenues by more than 60 percent.
In 1980, the last year of the Carter Administration, inflation rose to 13.5%. The top individual tax payer rate was 70%, unemployment was 7.4%, and the federal government grew while enacting huge new spending programs. We’re heading down the same path today. During that period, the US economy was the worst it has ever been since the Great Depression.
When Reagan took office, he wiped out price controls that were preventing oil companies from profitably drilling for and refining oil, drilling rigs started running and oil began to flow again. Even though there was a recession in 1982 brought on by the Fed increasing interest rates and reducing the money supply to combat the sky-high inflation in Carter’s final year in office, by the end of 1982 inflation was less than 4% and well under control. By 1986, the top marginal tax rate was down to 28% and oil was down to $20 per barrel. The economy was prospering and booming. The tax cuts combined with other initiatives created the largest sustained economic growth in our history. Our economy grew by more than a third in size and there was a $15 trillion increase in American wealth during the Reagan years. Capitalism and prosperity were forever joined.
Memo to President Obama and Congressional Democrats: We do not approve of Socialism.
We approve of the following:
• Cut individual and corporate income taxes
• Cut government spending
• Cut useless and expensive programs
• Avoid protectionist legislation
• Maintain low interest rates
• Control the money supply
• Incent businesses to expand, jobs and wealth will follow
• Crack down on employers of illegal aliens
• Protect and defend our borders
• Arrest and deport those here illegally
• Encourage people to have self-respect and be self-sufficient, instead of encouraging dependency on the government
We’ve all talked with those from prior generations who scoffed at the notion of accepting a government handout or welfare check. If welfare was used, it was temporary in nature until work could be found. There was something called pride and self-respect. Today, welfare has become a way of life. Self-respect has become self-disgrace. Pride has been overpowered by apathy. Our liberal Democratic leadership continues to promote government dependency because it serves a clear purpose: it secures a constituent base. They are metaphorical pimps feeding and controlling needy prostitutes. They are the Lords to their voting serfs.
Do liberal Dems know better, or do they have another agenda? Do Republicans have the backbone to stand on principle and fight? Is a third party needed? While the unanimous House Republican vote against the spending bill was promising, I suspect that we could take 535 average everyday citizens, replace the entire Senate and House, and do a better job than our elected 'leaders.'
But then, they have not set the bar very high. Most have forgotten why they have been elected. When Chuck Schumer made a comment about the American people not caring, it showed just how far out of touch with reality he is, and is also an indictment of those who continue to vote him and others like him into office. Maybe this will change. I sincerely hope that Congress finds the collective common sense and courage to realize that this is not about party politics or special interests; it’s not about lobbying which is nothing more than legalized bribery. They need to stop the greed and arrogance; and for a moment stop being a Democrat or Republican and start thinking like and being an American. Our children deserve it.
by Michael DiLuca
February 26, 2009
See also http://mikediluca.blogspot.com/
Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).
Obama is either insane or out to destroy the country
During the early years of his presidency and the Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt erratically jumped from one utopian idea to the next, like a grasshopper on speed, often contradicting a previous idea with a new idea, thus keeping his administration, Congress, business, the stock market, and foreign governments in a state of uncertainty of what was coming next. Then, when he became concerned about his reelection, FDR reverted to what he knew best, politics, and began feathering the nests of Democrat Party interest groups.
Although that was self-serving, at least it was rational.
Since Barack Obama can’t be concerned about reelection this early in his presidency, especially given how he is adored for his miraculous powers, it’s difficult to find a rational political explanation for his wildly contradictory statements and policies. Stupidity can’t explain them, because BO is smart, unlike George W. Bush, who is living proof that an Ivy League education isn’t necessarily an education.
That leaves two possible explanations for BO’s statements and policies: He is either insane or out to destroy the country.
On Feb. 21, BO stated that he was going to close the federal budget deficit by half by the end of his first term, implying that he would close it totally by the end of his second term. That statement came on the heels of a trillion dollars or more of planned stimulus spending, additional bailouts, and permanent increases in entitlements and mandates to the states.
Then, three days later, in an address to the mindless Jack-in-the-boxes in Congress, who popped out of their seats to applaud whenever BO pushed a button at the dais, BO completely contradicted his earlier statement about closing the deficit. He promised a $3.6 trillion budget, and, longer term, much higher costs for energy, education, and healthcare, to be funded by raising taxes on those earning more than $250,000 and by cutting the pay of physicians and other medical providers.
Insanity? Or is it willful destruction?
Whatever it is, it won’t have a happy ending. For one thing, even if the government confiscated all of the earnings from those making more than $250,000, the nation’s true debt would continue to be in the range of $53 trillion to $90 trillion, depending on whose estimates you believe. The true debt includes the net present value of the unfunded liabilities of the federal government, not just the smaller debt reported by the government through its fraudulent bookkeeping.
U.S. national income is about $12.5 trillion. If this amount is divided into the debt of $53 trillion to $90 trillion, we can get a rough estimate of how many years of income it would take to pay off the debt: 4.2 to 7.2 years. In other words, that’s about how many years it would take if the combined income of every American were spent on nothing but paying off the debt, assuming that the debt remained static and did not grow with new unfunded liabilities and deficit spending. If “only” a third of their income were taken to pay off the debt, it would take 13.5 to 22.5 years.
As I’ve reported in detail elsewhere, the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government, published by the Treasury Department, says that the government’s spending is not sustainable. And this dire warning was made before BO took the oath of office and proposed gargantuan increases in spending.
On second thought, maybe BO isn’t insane or out to destroy the country. Maybe he is stupid, after all. As evidence, he said in his address that government investment is needed to create new industries. That would have been news to Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, the Wright brothers, Alexander Graham Bell, Rowland Macy, John D. Rockefeller, David Sarnoff, William Paley, Thomas Watson, George Eastman, Walt Disney, Forrest Mars, Bill Gates, Sam Walton, and thousands of other entrepreneurs.
Heck, even George W. Bush understands this.
By Craig J. Cantoni
Feb. 26, 2009
An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at ccan2@aol.com.
Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).
-------- Response by Marty Dillian:
"Obama is either insane or out to destroy the country." Or both.
Would you agree that a conclusion of "stupidity" would require a massive nationwide "conspiracy" of stupid people? A conspiracy of that many stupid people seems improbable. If not insane, then evil describes those who would willfully destroy the country, their birthright. A combination of insane and evil people are more likely at the heart of the conspiracy now playing itself out before our eyes in Congress and many gubernatorial offices. My point is, the title of your article is 'spot on'.
Good article. I withdraw wondering to myself, is there a correlation between "stupid" or "evil," and "socialist?" I have to conclude in the affirmative. That in turn makes me remember that there is a documented nexus between socialism and religion. In Marx's own words, socialism is a religion. In point of fact, socialism could be described as an unshakable egalitarian belief system which is unsubstantiated by facts or history which arguably is used to dupe the masses into giving social and economic power to a madman who rules ruthlessly rather than governs, consciously choosing to ignore any semblence of democratic 'will of the people'. One is left to suppose that Barack Obama just may be the most dangerous of all men .... a religous zealot with a zombie-like cult following of lawless people seeking self-interest at the expense of all other Americans.
If "cult member" is an accurate description of those being duped, what is it going to take to "de-program" the media and many of the cult members in the electorate - short of their own self-inflicted demise? I wonder - can an entire nation be forcefully administered an economic and social poison by Congress, at the direction of Barack Obama, in quantities sufficient to kill the United States of America?
Response by Suzanne:
What can we do? Why don't people go to Washington and stand by the Capitol? Everybody does it when they are not happy. Why don't Conservatives stand up once? I would go if there was a march there. What do you think? Would that make a dent to this insanity?
Last night, we watched (in my case with disappointment and dismay) as President Obama -- with Speaker Pelosi applauding loudly behind him -- rolled out literally hundreds-of-billions more in spending and tax increases. Did you see how many people in the congressional audience and the media were beside themselves in ecstasy, also cheering and applauding wildly?
It was like watching one of those horror movies where the bad guy keeps coming back ... a bad guy whose only goal is termination of America ... with even more scary big government programs that have failed the American people time after time, decade after decade. But who reads or learns history and economics anymore?
If you're keeping score at home, here are some of the biggest boondoggles with the price tags attached:
"Continuing Resolution" legislation to fund existing federal programs at $410 billion -- an 8.7% increase in spending over the last year which is the biggest increase on domestic spending since the Carter Administration. Currently being debated this week and next.
Obama/Pelosi Housing Bailout at $275 billion.
Bank Bailout at estimated $1 trillion. Details of this new Bank Bailout are still fuzzy but there is no argument that the numbers are huge.
Nationalized Health Care proposal is to be announced this Thursday. The President is saying his "health care reform…will not wait another year." You should know what that means. Hundreds of billions more of your money and less individual health care choice for you.
So far, the Obama/Pelosi agenda has been ALL spending while taking our nation to historic debt levels. Last night, we saw the first big Obama/Pelosi tax increase. And it is genuinely massive -- try $1.2 trillion over the next decade on what else, ENERGY - the one sector of the economy where prices are lower (for the moment).
President Obama and Speaker Pelosi are now championing a "Cap and Trade" scheme that will ration energy while increasing taxes. A version of this proposal was introduced last year as the Warner/Lieberman Cap and Trade bill. Here are the key details from last year's legislation that are the basis for the Obama/Pelosi plan:
$1.2 TRILLION Tax Increase over 7 years on gasoline, home energy and really all energy in next decade. Source: Congressional Budget Office, April 10, 2008
This tax would cost the economy 3 to 4 million jobs according to an analysis by the American Council on Capital Formation
The average family would lose over $4,000 per year in purchasing power (and remember the Pelosi/Obama tax cut was only $800 per couple)
Gasoline prices would increase anywhere from 77 to 145 percent--that means prices of about $2 a gallon now would go up to $3.50 or even $5 a gallon.
In addition, the Washington Post has reported that President Obama's budget will also include income tax increases.
The numbers are staggering. But there is more. Under the Obama/Pelosi "Cap and Trade" scheme, for the first time the federal government will literally ration energy -- deciding how much energy should be available and at what cost to families and businesses. The impact on our families and economy will be disastrous.
Is this what you voted for?
Red State Patriot
Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).
-------------------------- Response by Fritz:
When added up, the new proposals which are pouring out of the White House at lightning speed, the totals are incomprehensible. Obama likes to say will be the only ones with tax increases will be those making over $250,000 per year. Even if those making over $250,000 per year, a shrinking group I assure you, gave up 100% of their income the new projects would not be funded.
Have you seen one proposal that would encourage new business formation? The idea that alternative energy is going to be the new business of the United States is not only short sighted, but sophomoric.
All of a sudden $700 billion here and $700 billion there is of no consequence. Those that say the Bush administration piled up enormous debt, should tighten their seat belts as this train is accelerating. The Iraq war has cost about $600-$800 billion over 6 years. The deficit for this year alone is projected at $1.75 trillion by the congressional budget office, and that is before the $410 billion the house and Senate has in their latest spending bill. There are trillion dollar deficits being spawned for years to come. Congress has criticized Americans for living beyond their means, with the use of home equity loans and credit cards. Their solution to the problem is to continue the process, however with government bonds and higher taxes.
In a video (see above) released February 20th, Alan Keyes, who lost to Obama in the 2004 U.S. Senate race in Illinois that launched the new president's national political career, calls Barack Obama a communist and usurper and says he refuses to acknowledge the validity of Obama's inauguration over lingering questions about the 44th president's birthplace.
The U.S. Constitution requires any president be born an American citizen. Barack Obama has steadfastly refused to provide evidence of his place of birth with an original birth certificate.
Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).
Mean Street: Why Obama’s Homeowner Rescue Is Bound to Fail
Posted by Deal Journal
Is there anything more heartless than foreclosing on a home and throwing a family out on the street? How about taxing the family next door into penury (extreme poverty; destitution) to pay for the reckless borrowing of its neighbors?
Welcome to the Obama Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan — a complicated wealth redistribution scheme dressed up as a cure for the nation’s housing woes.
Now, there is no doubting that Obama’s heart is in the right place. With foreclosures at record highs, the American white picket fence dream is crumbling.
And the impulse of any caring President must be to do something, almost anything to keep the dream alive.
But the experience of politicians tinkering with the U.S. housing market is not a happy one. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, anyone?
Real estate is simply too complex to be manipulated by anything but the “invisible hand” of the market.
Disagree?
Just read the four page White House Executive Summary with its laundry lists of programs, federal and state bureaucracies, conditions and caveats.
It’s confusing stuff even for the average MBA. How will it be digested by the average low-income subprime borrower?
Here’s the loan modification process:
“For a sample household with payments adding up to 43 percent of his monthly income, the lender would first be responsible for bringing down interest rates so that the borrower’s monthly mortgage payment is no more than 38% of his or her income. Next the initiative would match further reductions in interest payments dollar-for-dollar with the lender to bring that ratio down to 31 percent…”
Again, that’s the Executive Summary.
Can you imagine the chaos of a loan modification meeting between a subprime borrower and a bank officer?
Multiply that a few million times — and that’s the $75 billion “homeowner stability initiative.”
That’s if Obama is lucky enough to find the 3 to 4 million “responsible homeowners” he thinks would qualify or want to qualify for the government moolah.
But he’s almost certainly overestimating the number of “responsible homeowners” out there.
Those 3 to 4 million “responsible homeowners” are actually “credit challenged” borrowers. They put down very little money to purchase homes at very inflated prices.
Not only do they hold no equity in their homes today. Even with a modified loan, there is only a remote prospect of building equity in the future.
For most, economic self-interest says to walk away from the house rather than carry a modified mortgage that will suck up 31% of monthly income.
Truth is, many of the “credit challenged” borrowers won’t even get to running the numbers. They simply will have no interest in sitting down with a bank officer and going through pay stubs and tax returns.
Income verification? Are you kidding? That’s why many took the subprime mortgage in the first place.
That millions of homeowners were and are “irresponsible” is a harsh truth that Obama can’t really talk about.
In his America, the Obama housing plan is one neighbor helping another who is simply down on his luck. If only his America were real.
------------------- Response: Marty Dillian
The Obama stimulus plans (with more to come) are nothing more than a socialist redistribution of money from those who are struggling to those who are struggling. Essentially, you are being asked to pay for your mortgage, and to pay for your neighbor's mortgage, without little regard to their lifestyle or yours, with no concern for your children's needs, or your parent's needs, without regard to your future employment prospects, your future financial needs, that you have been trying to prepare for. These are not stimulus plans, but 'kiss of death' plans. Don't be so naive as to think the motives are well-intended or the outcome unintentional.
------------------- Response: Dick Doubek
HOW TO EXPLAIN THE STIMULUS BILL
Shortly after class, an economics student approaches his economics professor and says,
"I don't understand this stimulus bill. Can you explain it to me?"
The professor replied, "I don't have any time to explain it at my office, but if you come over to my house on Saturday and help me with my weekend project, I'll be glad to explain it to you." The student agreed.
At the agreed-upon time, the student showed up at the professor's house. The professor stated that the weekend project involved his backyard pool. They both went out back to the pool, and the professor handed the student a bucket. Demonstrating with his own bucket, the professor said, "First, go over to the deep end, and fill your bucket with as much water as you can." The student did as he was instructed.
The professor then continued, "Follow me over to the shallow end, and then dump all the water from your bucket into it." The student was naturally confused, but did as he was told.
The professor then explained they were going to do this many more times, and began walking back to the deep end of the pool. The confused student asked, "Excuse me, but why are we doing this?" The professor matter-of-factly stated that he was trying to make the shallow end much deeper.
The student didn't think the economics professor was serious, but figured that he would find out the real story soon enough. However, after the 6th trip between the shallow end and the deep end, the student began to become worried that his economics professor had gone mad.
The student finally replied, "All we're doing is wasting valuable time and effort on unproductive pursuits. Even worse, when this process is all over, everything will be at the same level it was before, so all you'll really have accomplished is the destruction of what could have been truly productive action!"
The professor put down his bucket and replied with a smile, "Congratulations. You now understand the stimulus bill."
Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).
