Dad’s Money (2/23/2011)
Nightly we are bombarded by incomprehensible numbers regarding Federal government spending: $14 trillion debt, $4 trillion budget, $1.5 trillion deficit and $180 billion interest payments. There are too many zeros on each number to print in this column, twelve each for the debt and deficit. Sadly, like gamblers in Las Vegas using colored poker chips we have lost sight of reality because no one touches the monies. As taxpayers our view of the government has become like a child’s view of Dad’s spending. A five-year-old watching his father has no idea where he gets money, but feels there is an endless supply. Sometimes Dad reaches in his pocket and uses green currency or coins like nickels and pennies. Other times Dad uses colorful plastic cards and swipes them in machines, and Dad has a book with checks where he illegibly scribbles names and amounts and declares the bills are paid. Of course, he also logs on his computer and banks via the web. Similarly, the government engages in a playful deception of payments, using computers, checks, and cash cards to move monies around.
Dad always seems to have money and as five-year olds we know he leaves each day and goes to work to make more. A connection between work and money seems obvious because doing chores sometimes brings allowance to children. As young children we always seem to have food, clothes, and toys. We don't know how the lights operate or anything about mortgages and rent, insurance, gasoline, or car payments. However, we know dad takes care of us and most citizens view the government the same way with no understanding of tax income or expenditures
Right now we are enjoying historically low interest rates, easing interest payments on our $14 trillion debt. If interest rates return to historic norms of 6% the payments will increase to approximately $840 billion, nearly 23% of our current budget. Like a five -year-old trusting Dad to make money and spend money to care for the family we believe our elected trustees will do the same. However, re-election drives decision making, not the tough longevity of parenting and sadly our federal government is recklessly spending money. Congress must be held accountable for the deficit spending because they are bankrupting our country. Every parent and grandparent should know what is happening and encourage Congress to stop today’s fiscal negligence. Congress is punishing our future generations with inflation, high interest rates and more taxes. Sadly a five-year-old cannot stop Dad’s recklessness, but as a voter you can stop Congress.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Homework
My daughter’s homework recently piqued my interest while she was studying for an exam. Currently, she's taking an American Government class; learning about types of government like authoritarian, dictatorship, oligarchy, and democracy. During our studying though we came to a handout that forced me to question today’s teaching as it focused on explaining the role of government. It is this question that divides left and right, Democrat and Republican. Personally I have a strong libertarian view which believes in a very limited role of government.
Reviewing her handout I learned there are seven roles taught to today’s students: defense, taxation, judiciary, education, health care, transportation, and economy. I wondered how many Thomas Jefferson would include on the list and speculated three: defense, taxation, and judicial review. Seeking a more definitive answer I found only defense and judicial protection receive consensus and without taxation the rest of the list cannot exist. Sadly, I think our country has reached a crossroads in development: we can have freedom and independence to control our lives with no government involvement but risk personal loss and failure, or we can mutually combine all of our earnings and share the bounty regardless of productivity to protect our entire society against any calamity that may befall us.
I believe the second option has been tried repeatedly throughout history and most recently by the idealist Karl Marx in a quest to end class struggles; recognizing the needs of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. Modern communism expanded on the efforts of Marx’s writings with Lenin and then Stalin accelerating its spread; dictatorial regimes use communism to disguise their own human rights atrocities. Many would claim the U.S. has recently failed at the longest running experiment in capitalism and laissez faire economics allowing business to overrun the working class. However, a quick glance at American history confirms anyone, regardless of status, education, or connection can succeed to enormous wealth, unlike communist nations allow. Successes like Bill Gates, Larry Page, and Jeffrey Bezos abound and even Presidents Clinton and Obama come from the poorest of backgrounds and family struggles.
Ayn Rand concisely describes the role of government “as, the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others.” I believe the role of government is to allow me freedom of choice – to succeed or fail
Reviewing her handout I learned there are seven roles taught to today’s students: defense, taxation, judiciary, education, health care, transportation, and economy. I wondered how many Thomas Jefferson would include on the list and speculated three: defense, taxation, and judicial review. Seeking a more definitive answer I found only defense and judicial protection receive consensus and without taxation the rest of the list cannot exist. Sadly, I think our country has reached a crossroads in development: we can have freedom and independence to control our lives with no government involvement but risk personal loss and failure, or we can mutually combine all of our earnings and share the bounty regardless of productivity to protect our entire society against any calamity that may befall us.
I believe the second option has been tried repeatedly throughout history and most recently by the idealist Karl Marx in a quest to end class struggles; recognizing the needs of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. Modern communism expanded on the efforts of Marx’s writings with Lenin and then Stalin accelerating its spread; dictatorial regimes use communism to disguise their own human rights atrocities. Many would claim the U.S. has recently failed at the longest running experiment in capitalism and laissez faire economics allowing business to overrun the working class. However, a quick glance at American history confirms anyone, regardless of status, education, or connection can succeed to enormous wealth, unlike communist nations allow. Successes like Bill Gates, Larry Page, and Jeffrey Bezos abound and even Presidents Clinton and Obama come from the poorest of backgrounds and family struggles.
Ayn Rand concisely describes the role of government “as, the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others.” I believe the role of government is to allow me freedom of choice – to succeed or fail
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Cairo - Do Americans Riot?
Cairo – Do Americans Riot?
Several weeks ago uprisings in Tunisia dominated the evening news and daily papers. Most Americans are quick to dismiss such events, and why not? Steven Tyler’s performance on “American Idol” or the choosing of 20-something millionaires to play in the Super Bowl delude the masses; appearing far more important than citizens risking their lives for freedom. I too have felt the challenge to understand, but in college I watched Chinese students challenge communist regime and ultimately give their lives in Tiananmen Square to demonstrate the human rights violations of their government. Growing up I knew the communists of the U.S.S.R. regularly violated individual freedoms and imprisoned citizens behind the iron curtain. Through Hollywood movies I learned more about the fight after World War II and my history classes tried to explain the actions of authoritarianism and dictatorships.
Although many arguments about the cause may be made, the issues in Cairo this week are driven by 30 years of authoritarian rule under President Hosni Mubarak and a discontent youth rebelling against his authority. But the recent riots are not new, and by no means ultimately represent the underlying problems in a country desirous of democracy but operating with an ancient mentality. On November 24, 2010 a Christian was killed, 100 arrested and 3,000 demonstrators protested the razing of a new Christian church built without a permit. Under Ottoman law a permit is required to build a Christian church, in contrast Mosques are built easily and regularly without review of a state authority. Today many assertions are being made in the media that the riots are religious in nature, but local reporting and blogging, held an opposite view. Instead, the riots are the result of 30 years of oppression and dictatorship and inspired by the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia.
As the World’s policeman the American citizenry believes our own government is above such actions and the riots we watch overseas could not occur here. My wife and I had a conversation this week about Americans and whether riots would take place here. Coincidentally I am reading a book, “The Emerging Police State” by William Kunstler and together we watched “Battle in Seattle,” chronicling protests against the World Trade Organization. Skeptically I listen to the outrageous conspiracy claims of Alex Jones and wonder if any truth inspires. As I learn more though I have discovered striking parallels between the radical claims of the left and the right; the common thread leading to a questioning of our government’s actions. Uprisings have occurred on our soil, and many are similar to Egypt: spurred by youth and ideological believers desperate for change and an opportunity to be heard. Sadly, like Egypt, death has come upon those who question the United States government or the corporations profiting and seeking protections through the rule of law.
Kunstler’s book is a compilation of speeches made through the years and inspired by his battles for justice. In my opinion it is easy to condemn the actions of those we do not like, but it is more important to defend the application of justice when we like it least. From a speech in 1971, with memories of Kent State fresh, long forgotten to the annals of time and unknown to anyone under age 40 today, he indicts the government for condoning the slaughter of unarmed students, using the law to fabricate evidence and justify its actions. In the most disgusting example, the Grand Jury which is supposed to provide protection from the law, but serves as an agency of the government, found the National Guard justified in shooting, although no student sniper existed and it was a Major’s discharge of his sidearm that prompted spraying the crowd with bullets. Furthermore, the Grand Jury recommended .22-caliber bullets should be used against future student demonstrators instead of the larger, more harmful caliber M-1.
Forty years later, in the summer of 2010, Pittsburg was shut down and noise suppression cannons were used to hold off G-20 demonstrators. No one was killed, but our government has mechanisms to slow and prevent demonstrations. Likewise, the movie “Battle in Seattle” shows the offensive measures police and National Guard took against WTO protesters in 1999. Since then “Exclusion Zones” have been created and are defined as “areas where protesters are legally prohibited.” A quick read of the Bill of Rights contradicts this as the Congress was prohibited from passing any law interfering with the right to peacefully assemble. Without protest though, we have sheepishly allowed court rulings to support the establishment of Exclusion Zones and Free Speech Zones, often located miles from the desired protest site and set behind concrete barriers, fencing, and razor wire.
Watching from a distance this past week I am concerned our government and media does not condemn Egypt’s actions to shut down the internet and communications. With bi-partisan support the Senate is prepared to again introduce legislation to create an “Internet Kill Switch.” In Egypt stopping communication has become necessary to thwart organizing by protesters. I believe many Americans view such actions as part of their perception of safety, but I counter it is another step in the incremental destruction of our freedoms. When challenged, a congressional white paper on the measure said the proposal prohibits the government from targeting websites for censorship “based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.” Ironically, the same language is used in the Patriot Act.
Our country is radically changing, not in terms of Democrat versus Republican, but government and corporations versus citizenry. Each of the Amendments of the Bill of Rights has been usurped over the last 40 years to protect the state and corporation. Meanwhile we have sat idly by accepting, like children, the supposed safety created in exchange for liberty. We have watched legislation pass that punishes minorities and the indigent in greater numbers. Currently the mainstream populace finds itself victim to the banking, mortgage, and credit fraud perpetrated by the elite few and legitimized by Congress. I challenge you to understand why youth in Egypt are risking their lives against oppression, question why Icelandic people rioted to avoid the indebtedness of the banks, why 170,000 TSA employees have the freedom to ignore the Fourth Amendment, and why both sides of Congress support legislation to cut communications via the Internet. From the comfort of our homes it is safer to let others protest and not put ourselves at risk. I think the answer to my wife’s question about whether Americans riot is easy, “the passionate due, the idle don’t.”
Several weeks ago uprisings in Tunisia dominated the evening news and daily papers. Most Americans are quick to dismiss such events, and why not? Steven Tyler’s performance on “American Idol” or the choosing of 20-something millionaires to play in the Super Bowl delude the masses; appearing far more important than citizens risking their lives for freedom. I too have felt the challenge to understand, but in college I watched Chinese students challenge communist regime and ultimately give their lives in Tiananmen Square to demonstrate the human rights violations of their government. Growing up I knew the communists of the U.S.S.R. regularly violated individual freedoms and imprisoned citizens behind the iron curtain. Through Hollywood movies I learned more about the fight after World War II and my history classes tried to explain the actions of authoritarianism and dictatorships.
Although many arguments about the cause may be made, the issues in Cairo this week are driven by 30 years of authoritarian rule under President Hosni Mubarak and a discontent youth rebelling against his authority. But the recent riots are not new, and by no means ultimately represent the underlying problems in a country desirous of democracy but operating with an ancient mentality. On November 24, 2010 a Christian was killed, 100 arrested and 3,000 demonstrators protested the razing of a new Christian church built without a permit. Under Ottoman law a permit is required to build a Christian church, in contrast Mosques are built easily and regularly without review of a state authority. Today many assertions are being made in the media that the riots are religious in nature, but local reporting and blogging, held an opposite view. Instead, the riots are the result of 30 years of oppression and dictatorship and inspired by the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia.
As the World’s policeman the American citizenry believes our own government is above such actions and the riots we watch overseas could not occur here. My wife and I had a conversation this week about Americans and whether riots would take place here. Coincidentally I am reading a book, “The Emerging Police State” by William Kunstler and together we watched “Battle in Seattle,” chronicling protests against the World Trade Organization. Skeptically I listen to the outrageous conspiracy claims of Alex Jones and wonder if any truth inspires. As I learn more though I have discovered striking parallels between the radical claims of the left and the right; the common thread leading to a questioning of our government’s actions. Uprisings have occurred on our soil, and many are similar to Egypt: spurred by youth and ideological believers desperate for change and an opportunity to be heard. Sadly, like Egypt, death has come upon those who question the United States government or the corporations profiting and seeking protections through the rule of law.
Kunstler’s book is a compilation of speeches made through the years and inspired by his battles for justice. In my opinion it is easy to condemn the actions of those we do not like, but it is more important to defend the application of justice when we like it least. From a speech in 1971, with memories of Kent State fresh, long forgotten to the annals of time and unknown to anyone under age 40 today, he indicts the government for condoning the slaughter of unarmed students, using the law to fabricate evidence and justify its actions. In the most disgusting example, the Grand Jury which is supposed to provide protection from the law, but serves as an agency of the government, found the National Guard justified in shooting, although no student sniper existed and it was a Major’s discharge of his sidearm that prompted spraying the crowd with bullets. Furthermore, the Grand Jury recommended .22-caliber bullets should be used against future student demonstrators instead of the larger, more harmful caliber M-1.
Forty years later, in the summer of 2010, Pittsburg was shut down and noise suppression cannons were used to hold off G-20 demonstrators. No one was killed, but our government has mechanisms to slow and prevent demonstrations. Likewise, the movie “Battle in Seattle” shows the offensive measures police and National Guard took against WTO protesters in 1999. Since then “Exclusion Zones” have been created and are defined as “areas where protesters are legally prohibited.” A quick read of the Bill of Rights contradicts this as the Congress was prohibited from passing any law interfering with the right to peacefully assemble. Without protest though, we have sheepishly allowed court rulings to support the establishment of Exclusion Zones and Free Speech Zones, often located miles from the desired protest site and set behind concrete barriers, fencing, and razor wire.
Watching from a distance this past week I am concerned our government and media does not condemn Egypt’s actions to shut down the internet and communications. With bi-partisan support the Senate is prepared to again introduce legislation to create an “Internet Kill Switch.” In Egypt stopping communication has become necessary to thwart organizing by protesters. I believe many Americans view such actions as part of their perception of safety, but I counter it is another step in the incremental destruction of our freedoms. When challenged, a congressional white paper on the measure said the proposal prohibits the government from targeting websites for censorship “based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.” Ironically, the same language is used in the Patriot Act.
Our country is radically changing, not in terms of Democrat versus Republican, but government and corporations versus citizenry. Each of the Amendments of the Bill of Rights has been usurped over the last 40 years to protect the state and corporation. Meanwhile we have sat idly by accepting, like children, the supposed safety created in exchange for liberty. We have watched legislation pass that punishes minorities and the indigent in greater numbers. Currently the mainstream populace finds itself victim to the banking, mortgage, and credit fraud perpetrated by the elite few and legitimized by Congress. I challenge you to understand why youth in Egypt are risking their lives against oppression, question why Icelandic people rioted to avoid the indebtedness of the banks, why 170,000 TSA employees have the freedom to ignore the Fourth Amendment, and why both sides of Congress support legislation to cut communications via the Internet. From the comfort of our homes it is safer to let others protest and not put ourselves at risk. I think the answer to my wife’s question about whether Americans riot is easy, “the passionate due, the idle don’t.”
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
1970s versus 201Xs
The kids wearing plaid pants and striped shirts with long hair watching the “Brady Bunch”, “Adam-12” and “Emergency” are the men and women running our government today. It seems these “kids” have no recollection of the politics or monetary policy of the 1970s, instead only remembering the Bicentennial, bell bottom jeans, and Nerf footballs. A careful examination will show a decade that suffered an energy crisis causing an immediate recession. The same happened in 2008 when oil prices rose rapidly to $147/bbl driving our economy over a cliff to financial Armageddon. Nixon removed the Gold standard in 1971, and the Federal Reserve enacted new monetary policies to bring recovery. No radical method helped Nixon or Ford, and a hopeless Democrat was elected; promising prosperity and unable to deliver as we added the word “stagflation” to our vocabulary. As America entered the 1980s, after seven years of lackluster growth interest rates rose rapidly crushing the housing recovery. I remember my own parents struggling with 18% rates, job loss, and our manufacturing shift overseas as Chrysler sought a bailout and American’s learned “Made in Japan” meant quality compared to our union produced assembly lines.
For ten years inflation was high, reaching 13.5% in 1980 and unemployment soared above 10%, but like today the same policies were held: Federal spending never slowed, and tax increases for the rich were proposed. Gold prices accelerated and fueled speculation the end was near and the economy would not survive. Talk of wind mills, solar panels, energy conservation, and self-sufficiency abounded. Reviewing newspapers from the early 1980’s it is easy to spot Tip O’Neill’s 100-plus Democrat majority was adding to federal spending faster than the revenues received, not unlike the recent Pelosi dynasty. I found one article stating for every 1% increase in unemployment Federal spending deficits increased by $25-40 billion during the 1982 recession because unemployment drives down revenue and causes government to spend more.
Many argue the cornucopianism of Ronald Reagan saved the economy through supply-side tax cuts. I would argue a direct correlation should be made between recovery and oil prices as the UK's discoveries of North Sea oil increased supply and probably fueled the recovery of the 1980’s and 1990’s. The 1970’s are remembered for Disco and parties, instead we should truly understand the damage of failed economic policies. We are three years into the current economic decline and the kids I knew now run Congress; I would offer 1970’s history provides more answers than the academic speculation used today.
For ten years inflation was high, reaching 13.5% in 1980 and unemployment soared above 10%, but like today the same policies were held: Federal spending never slowed, and tax increases for the rich were proposed. Gold prices accelerated and fueled speculation the end was near and the economy would not survive. Talk of wind mills, solar panels, energy conservation, and self-sufficiency abounded. Reviewing newspapers from the early 1980’s it is easy to spot Tip O’Neill’s 100-plus Democrat majority was adding to federal spending faster than the revenues received, not unlike the recent Pelosi dynasty. I found one article stating for every 1% increase in unemployment Federal spending deficits increased by $25-40 billion during the 1982 recession because unemployment drives down revenue and causes government to spend more.
Many argue the cornucopianism of Ronald Reagan saved the economy through supply-side tax cuts. I would argue a direct correlation should be made between recovery and oil prices as the UK's discoveries of North Sea oil increased supply and probably fueled the recovery of the 1980’s and 1990’s. The 1970’s are remembered for Disco and parties, instead we should truly understand the damage of failed economic policies. We are three years into the current economic decline and the kids I knew now run Congress; I would offer 1970’s history provides more answers than the academic speculation used today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)