If those of us who are opposed to the current administration and Congress let those same folks ingrain the idea in the body politic that we are merely obstructionist, we are doomed. To just say no is to say we support the status quo and are convinced that since nothing is broken, nothing needs fixing. There are many things in America that are broken and need fixing and everyone should agree on that. The argument is over how to fix what is broken.
Liberals think that the government can fix all these broken things if we will just give them the authority to do so. The rest of us know better because what has government ever done right? History shows that government screws up everything it touches beyond all reason and belief. Civil servants have no vested interest in getting things right. They are only interested in covering their asses so they can keep their position at the public trough. Individuals and competitive profit making business have a vested interest in getting it right.
We need a forum for our proposals on how to fix what is broken. General principles can be done easily such as the ones at: PUMA Coalition Positions. The problem is that philosophical positions are not grabbers with the general voting public as opposed to political activists. To convince the non-activists to join us requires that we have specific solutions to solve known problems. We are going to take a stab at offering some fairly radical ideas on providing these fixes in the order that they are important to the American People as delineated by Rasmussen Reports.
These are: Gov't Ethics/Corruption, Economy, Health Care, Nat'l Security/War on Terror, Social Security, Taxes, Education, Immigration, War in Iraq and Abortion. Each of these problems is laid out along with our proposed solutions at www.marstonchronicles.info
We Cannot Just Say No
Some NH Natives are Getting Restless
From The Marston Chronicles
If one were to take a look at the present political climate and find resistance to an incredibly expensive and ever more pervasive federal government, one might expect to look in fly-over country. So it comes as something of a shock to find the resistance in the midst of the solid blue states of New England. Granted that New Hampshire is less liberal than the rest of New England, but it did go for Obama after all. So how are some of these New Hampshire natives getting restless?
It seems that a some members of the state legislature, called the General Court there, decided that enough was enough. They introduced House Concurrent Resolution 6 that effectively tells the federal government to take a hike. The meat of the resolution minces no words and states:
"That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and
That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and
That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;” and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press:” thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force..."
So how do you like them apples, federal government? Not only do your laws suck, but they are null and void, so there. This should keep legions of lawyers busy for a long time should this Resolution be adopted. Anyone else want to jump on this bandwagon?
The Stimulus Package: Fear Mongering and Crisis Propagation, the Liberal Way
Cross posted at Politics and Critical Thinking.
This attempt at breaking down the stimulus from the beginning to the end will not be an easy undertaking, since I am not economist. However, neither is President Obama, he is a lawyer. Nevertheless, there is ample information from sound sources to help the average tax payer understand exactly what the government is asking of them and the other possibilities for economic stimulus. This first addition is a challenge to the government's claim that we are in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Also, this will show how they are propagating fear in order to push their agenda onto the American people.
As far as this blog is concerned, free markets and economics are inexorably connected to the liberty and prosperity of every individual American. This is not to say humankind is free due to capitalism, just that if used properly, it can be the engine of that freedom. Mankind is unarguably born with certain unalienable rights that are derived from Higher, not from monetary, fiscal, or economic policy.
However, despots, tyrants, dictators, and megalomaniacs have learned throughout the years that by manipulating these economic systems they can attain a greater accumulation of power over their citizenry. Infringing on, if not taking away these freedoms, all in the name of the State. Thereby, creating an atmosphere of dependency on the government for even the most basic daily needs.
Even as far back as October, then Senator Obama, was stirring fears that this was the greatest economic downfall since the Great Depression. Recently, even his toadies and acolytes have been echoing the same sentiments. All for the sake of spreading fear and generating hopes that they have the only answers to end this crisis.
Now, only a fool would say, with a straight face, we aren't in hard times and things aren't going to get harder. But the egregious claims and fear mongering of the Obama administration fall apart once you look at history.
According to the Bureau of Labor, from 1930-41 the unemployment rate never dropped below 8.9% and actually went as high as 24.9%. When the recession deepened in circa 1981-82, unemployment sat at well over 10%. We are presently at 7.4%, althoughthis number will undoubtedly get higher, it still remains to be seen whether it tops either of these benchmarks.
As far as GDP, from 1929-1933 there was a major constriction, to put it mildly. The GDP output of the United States in 1929 was $865.2 billion and in 1933 it sat at $635.3 billion, this represents a -29.3% decline in the gross domestic product of the US in a 4 year period. It was not until 1936 when the GDP reached $866.6 billion, did the economy finally overcome the 1929 tally. This represents real growth of only $1.4 billion over a 7 year period. Furthermore, this still does not address the rampant inflation or unemployment most Americans still faced.
In 1981 the GDP sat at $5,291.7 trillion, then in 1982 after a major contraction brought on by the recession it was lowered to $5,189.3 trillion, meaning a decline of -1.9%.
Looking at the breakdown of each quarter in FY 2008 you gain a comparison between them and the previous recessions. In FY 2008 we had 1st quarter growth of .9% (Final Report), 2nd quarter growth was 2.8% (Final Report), the 3rd quarter sat at -.03% (Preliminary Report), and finally 4th quarter results were a -3.8% loss (Advanced Report). Totaling up the BEA's quarterly reports for FY 2008 results in a net loss of -1.3%. The recession of 1981-82 still sets higher in losses by +.6% and there is no contest between the losses that were incurred during the Great Depression years which totaled -29.3%. The best year for declines in GDP, during this time, was actually 1933, when there was a loss, ironically, of -1.3%.
How interesting that once you crunch the numbers you see quite a different picture than what the administration is selling. Quite simply, they are misrepresenting the facts in order to perpetuate fear and panic to gain public support for their expensive and expansive government project. Again this is not to say things are not bad or they will not get worse, this is simply where we are at right now. We have one recession, 27 years ago which was actually worse, yet no one was running around talking about spending our way into oblivion. Quite to the contrary, then President Reagan used tax cuts to stimulate the economy. He brought about huge gains for the American people by creating 20 million new quality jobs under his administration, ushering an era of prosperity and hope that lasted for a little over 15 years.
Please note, the figures presented here are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Read them for yourself, don't take my word for it.
Automaker Bailout Rescue, The Presidential Way
With opening remarks stating. . .
For years, America's automakers have faced serious challenges –- burdensome costs, a shrinking share of the market, and declining profits. *
. . .many were stricken with hope that someone finally got it, and also that no financial help would be offered. However, things quickly turned sour when he said:
If we were to allow the free market to take its course now, it would almost certainly lead to disorderly bankruptcy and liquidation for the automakers. Under ordinary economic circumstances, I would say this is the price that failed companies must pay –- and I would not favor intervening to prevent the automakers from going out of business.
But these are not ordinary circumstances. In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action. The question is how we can best give it a chance to succeed. Some argue the wisest path is to allow the auto companies to reorganize through Chapter 11 provisions of our bankruptcy laws -– and provide federal loans to keep them operating while they try to restructure under the supervision of a bankruptcy court. But given the current state of the auto industry and the economy, Chapter 11 is unlikely to work for American automakers at this time. *
Disorderly bankruptcy? Since when was bankruptcy either orderly or disorderly? Any way you look at it, someone is bound to point fingers rather than accepting defeat. Without exception, Pres. Bush pointed his finger saying:
Additionally, the financial crisis brought the auto companies to the brink of bankruptcy much faster than they could have anticipated –- and they have not made the legal and financial preparations necessary to carry out an orderly bankruptcy proceeding that could lead to a successful restructuring. *
Offering a helping hand of sorts to the abysmal U.S. "2" when they haven't protected themselves, is but one thing: INSANITY.
So, what did the President have to offer?
A more responsible option is to give the auto companies an incentive to restructure outside of bankruptcy -– and a brief window in which to do it. And that is why my administration worked with Congress on a bill to provide automakers with loans to stave off bankruptcy while they develop plans for viability.
These loans will provide help in two ways. First, they will give automakers three months to put in place plans to restructure into viable companies -– which we believe they are capable of doing. Second, if restructuring cannot be accomplished outside of bankruptcy, the loans will provide time for companies to make the legal and financial preparations necessary for an orderly Chapter 11 process that offers a better prospect of long-term success –- and gives consumers confidence that they can continue to buy American cars. *
Seemingly somewhat contradictory to a statement made earlier in his address, stating:
American consumers understand why: If you hear that a car company is suddenly going into bankruptcy, you worry that parts and servicing will not be available, and you question the value of your warranty. And with consumers hesitant to buy new cars from struggling automakers, it would be more difficult for auto companies to recover. *
American consumers understand that this industry has failed, due simply to a failed business plan and the high demands that the Union has placed on them. Americans also understand that if they were to perform an "orderly bankruptcy," it would allow these companies to restructure and reorganize; keeping a level of "confidence" among consumers.
So, the next thing to examine would be: "Where is the $13-$17+ billion coming from? What are the terms of this 'loan'? and When does it have to be paid back?"
[It] will be drawn from the financial rescue package Congress approved earlier this fall. The terms of the loans will require auto companies to demonstrate how they would become viable. They must pay back all their loans to the government, and show that their firms can earn a profit and achieve a positive net worth. This restructuring will require meaningful concessions from all involved in the auto industry –- management, labor unions, creditors, bondholders, dealers, and suppliers.
In particular, automakers must meet conditions that experts agree are necessary for long-term viability –- including putting their retirement plans on a sustainable footing, persuading bondholders to convert their debt into capital the companies need to address immediate financial shortfalls, and making their compensation competitive with foreign automakers who have major operations in the United States. If a company fails to come up with a viable plan by March 31st, it will be required to repay its federal loans.
The automakers and unions must understand what is at stake, and make hard decisions necessary to reform, These conditions send a clear message to everyone involved in the future of American automakers: The time to make the hard decisions to become viable is now -– or the only option will be bankruptcy. *
While this puts an enormous amount of stress on the plate of the Big "2", it still leaves a glimpse of hope by the tax-paying Americans who are footing this automaker bailout rescue. It also leaves many people wondering what is next, and if they themselves will get a "bailout." Some are still left wondering the difference between an "orderly" vs. "disorderly" bankruptcy. Then again, everyone is forced to play the "wait, watch, and see" game.
* - RealClearPolitics
Government Can Create Jobs ... Just Not Real Jobs
Job Creation 101
The government has a role to play in the economy, it can either encourage an economy to grow or persuade an economy to shrink. President Kennedy stated that tax cuts creates jobs and salaries that create more jobs and salaries. This result comes about when the government helps the economy by lowering the tax burden on industry and the individual. This was also the strategy employed by Ronald Reagan as he led the United States out of the most serious recession since the Great Depression. George W. Bush also lowered taxes, which created an economic boom for most of his time in office.
The government persuades the economy to shrink when it takes over the role of "job creator" from the American people. Franklin Roosevelt believed that it was the government's responsibility to create jobs and he was right in his belief that government can create jobs. In fact, anybody can create a job. To paraphrase the economist Milton Friedman jobs can be created simply by "handing somebody a shovel and paying him to dig a ditch and then finding somebody else to fill in the ditch." We have theoretically created two "new" jobs. What President Roosevelt did not realize was that government can not create jobs at the expense of the private sector. President Roosevelt increased taxes to support the massive government "recovery" programs he instituted. Roosevelt honestly believed that the government could run an economy better than the private sector. His attempts to end the depression were devastating and made things worse.
Lets take a look at the minimum wage, Roosevelt saw that Americans were suffering and they were suffering because they were not receiving enough income. The problem with using a minimum wage to repair this problem is that it leads to more unemployment. Imagine that you are a business owner during the depression and you have about seven employees. You make just enough to turn a profit and you pay your workers accordingly. Now Roosevelt institutes across the board tax increases in order to fund his programs and the minimum wage. You now have to fire some workers to maintain your level of profitability and still pay the new wages and taxes. Now the nation has a few more people added to the social program's books and now we need even more taxes to fund these programs. The higher taxes causes more businesses to fail and more people on the unemployment line.
Roosevelt also made the same mistake with prices. Wages were too low and prices were too low, so he sought to ARTIFICIALLY increase both. He saw that farmers were struggling and tried to manipulate the market price of produce by enforcing new regulations that limited the amount a farmer could plant and the price on the market.
So the point is .... "President-Elect" Obama is attempting to employ the same strategy to bring the United States out of a recession. He has proposed massive government infrastructure programs through the construction of new roads, public buildings, bridges etc. etc. etc.
But this is the same as "handing somebody a shovel" ... these new infrastructure plans will only create the jobs needed for the construction and no more, when a school is built ... it is built, end of story. Obama also fails to recognize that we do not live in the 1930s anymore. American citizens were more likely to be able to work as construction laborers then. After all, the hardest hit sectors of the economy included heavy manufacturing. The artificial jobs created by the government in the Great Depression could, at the very least, offer temporary employment to the out of work laborers. However, the unemployed today include many more white collar workers, such as accountants, bankers, and workers in the technology industries. The unemployed today are not nearly as prepared for heavy labor as they were in the 1930s and 1940s.
It is also important to note that FDR's plans did nothing to ease the Great Depression.
Why? ... because government can only create artificial jobs that do not lead to "more jobs and salaries that lead to more jobs and salaries."
