Thursday, August 11, 2011

Why We Are In The Mess We Are In

Living deep in Blue California is sometimes mind-numbing because of the way so many people think.
Consider this.
A group of far-left Democrats are not happy with the Democrat congressman that represents my town of Pasadena, Adam Schiff.
They made their feelings known in a protest outside Congressman Schiff's Pasadena office yesterday.
FTR, Congressman Schiff did vote for the debt-ceiling plan just passed in Congress and signed by the Dear Leader, President Obama.
But these "progressives" are not happy that Congressman Schiff voted for the plan.
For these people think that this is awful. Just awful. That there will potentially be necessary budget cuts to bring about a balance of the federal budget books.
Here is what Paul Krehbiel, an organizer of the protest had to say:

“We’re really upset our Congressional representatives, including Schiff, did not find new areas of revenue creation in this debt-ceiling agreement. We’re concerned cuts mandated by the deal will be devastating, especially to people who are already suffering.”

Get the euphemism Mr. Krehbiel uses for taxes. "Revenue creation". Ooh boy! These lefties love to use private-sector buzz terms to make it seem like they are not promoting tax hikes.
Look, when the federal government is talking "revenue creation" there are only one of two options. A slew of fees and or taxes.
I do agree that many people are hurting. The many able-bodied, mind clear Americans that have no job and or no hope for a job. There are about 5,000,000 Americans that are out of work and have given up looking for work.
Ahh, but another bright light offers a solution to that problem.
Here is Linnea Warren, 56, of Pasadena. Do you know her solution to the unemployment problem in the United States? Well, here it is:

“We didn’t get out of the Depression by cutting spending, but by creating government jobs.”

Yes, there were a lot of make-work projects under a slew of alphabet agencies, but one of the most famous or infamous known as the Works Project Administration or WPA.
Now yes, people were working creating a slew of make work projects. Many are still around today. But did it solve the problem of high unemployment?
Hell no.
When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office in March. 1933, the unemployment rate was a staggering 24.75%. Until 1940, unemployment never went below 14% of the workforce.
So Linnea, how did those government jobs work out? Not well at all when it took getting into a war to eventually bring the unemployment rate down.
The problem with so-called progressives is that they really have no clue as to how the private economy works.
They really believe that people making $250,000 a year in gross income is the filthy, degenerate rich. The problem with that is that could be a married couple, say a doctor and a lawyer, whose combined income meets that magic wealth figure. Never mind that the doc may be in private practice, employing office staff and or nurses. Or the same for the lawyer. Maybe that lawyer has hung their shingle rather than work for a firm. Guess what? That lawyer needs support staff. There! Many potentially long-term jobs are created.
If one looks at the WPA program so touted by the "progressives", it was at best a temporary program to alleviate long-term unemployment. It was in fact the stated aim of the WPA that it was a stop-gap until the economy recovered. Remember, unemployment never went below 14% at the height of the WPA program.
Yet people really believe that make-work government jobs is the path to prosperity.
Before the Great Depression, there was a depression in 1920-21. Yet the solution was not massive government, but tax cuts and lessening the government's role in the private economy. In fact, at the beginning of the 1920-21 depression, unemployment was at 5.2% of the workforce. By the height of the depression, it was at either 8.7% or 11.7%. By 1923 during the Roaring 20s, unemployment was at either 4.8% or 2.4%. In fact, supply-side economics worked. The tax rate was lowered and expanded and the government had more money coming in. And during this period, there were time when there was no federal budget deficits and the surplus money was going to pay off the national debt.
Another aspect is the entitlement culture that "progressive" policies have made.
Take this protester, Suzanne O’Shea, 50, of Altadena. She was there for her mom. Her mom, according to her, relies totally on her social security check and Medicaid for her healthcare. From Miss O'Shea's mouth:

“She’ll have issues if these government social programs are cut as will millions of American seniors. It’s unfortunate to take money from government programs in this kind of an economy.”

I would like to ask a question to Miss O'Shea. What is she doing to help her mother out? Does she help with her mom's foodstuffs? Does she help with any of her mom's basic bills like the electric and gas? If the intrepid reporter asked those questions, there might have been a little clarity.
I am not heartless. There are people in our society that do need a hand up, not a hand out. But what "progressive" government has done is taken family responsibility out of the picture. Parents helping children. Children helping their parents. Neighbor helping neighbor. In this case, the mom is given a false sense of security with government assistance. The daughter thinks that the government should provide the money and healthcare for her mom. It is a mindset.
With this mindset, that the government can solve all, it is why we are in the mess we are in. Economically, socially, politically and yes, spiritually.
And there is no short-term fix for any of it. And it will be fraught with painful choices. But I am an optimist. I think that this is a time to restore our nation to a time of helping each other out and self-reliance. Other wise, this mess continues.


No comments: