Scott Brown and I both drive pickups (nobody calls them "pickup trucks" except city folk). We both championed JFK’s tax cuts. We don’t share the same exposure however so now he’s a Senator and we’re stuck with this blog. That’s ok; we’ll plod along, continuing to overload all our friends’ and cousins’ computers.
Here’s what Brown said: "And remember, as President John F. Kennedy stated, that starts with across-the-board tax cuts for businesses and families to create jobs, put more money in people’s pockets, and stimulate the economy. It’s that simple." Well, not quite, but that, and the perfect timing of this election, at the very point of maximum Obama-driven-nausea, got the job done.
Private enterprise likes Brown’s message. The idea of across-the-board cuts - fine and fair. And certainly if Congress takes the galaxy of tax hikes which are now on the table, off the table, entities which were once employers will once again begin to hire. Otherwise, they will simply continue to make changes that will permanently reduce their appetite for employees, permanently as in forever.
This message will be lost on Obama & Co. The fact that it may be perfectly clear to reasonable individuals is beside the point. Radicals, be they communist labor organizers in the fields of California in the 30's, or be they present day, far-left elitists, all and always and everywhere destroy anything in their way, even their own kind. Both are rigidly programmed to change America, to see to the concentration of planning, thus power in the hands of a highly centralized government. BO is not a communist, nor is he a socialist. BO is a statist. He does not want to necessarily own productive resources; he wants to control productive resources. In such a way he intends to level the playing field.
Finally, Obama and Co consider themselves so morally and mentally superior to the common slob that it is not necessary to reconsider their agenda. It’s our problem. We’re too stupid.
Our trial lawyer friend reminds us of how "bright" Obama and other elitists really are. Don’t worry he says. Neither did Stalin worry; these types were exactly the bunch to whom his term "useful idiots" referred. Real bright types like Henry Wallace, who never could understand why Truman applied the ax.
Robert Craven
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
640M Jobs Saved Or Created You Say?
Hey!! Now wait just one minute. Didn’t we just explain that gov’t spending cannot create jobs on a net basis, that even if all of the so-call "stimulus" money was spent in 5 minutes, that it’s the equivalent of taking water out of one end of the pool and putting into the other, at best? I think we did. Then what gives? Obama tells us today that, "As of the end of the fourth quarter of 2009, $263 billion of the total $787 billion included in the Act, or about one-third of the total, has been outlayed or received as tax cuts. If one includes spending that has been obligated but not yet outlayed, the fraction is over one-half." He then tells us that about 640,000 jobs were saved or created by recipients of the funds as of the end of Q3. That is just swell Obama, nice work. One little problem - you are a liar (Your campaign promises were all lies. Why not one more you say?)
"Saved or created" huh Obama? Newspapers and other media outlets across the US have so far identified 94,341 fake jobs reported by your staff as "saved or created." We are reminded by the Heritage Foundation that after the GAO issued a report finding "significant reporting and processing problems that need to be addressed," your spokesman Ed Pound offered this defense of the jobs numbers, "Who knows, man, who really knows."
We do.
We know exactly what the job numbers are, and from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the only organization in the US which has for years compiled this data, through both a household and an establishment survey. We had that report last Friday. The US shed 85,000 jobs in Dec/09, bringing the total to 2.7 million jobs lost since the stimulus was passed, and 3.4million since BO became president.
Now BO, if I were you I’d re-think your strategy of treating the masses like rocks. We’re not that dumb and you’re about to get bit in the ass my friend.
Robert Craven
"Saved or created" huh Obama? Newspapers and other media outlets across the US have so far identified 94,341 fake jobs reported by your staff as "saved or created." We are reminded by the Heritage Foundation that after the GAO issued a report finding "significant reporting and processing problems that need to be addressed," your spokesman Ed Pound offered this defense of the jobs numbers, "Who knows, man, who really knows."
We do.
We know exactly what the job numbers are, and from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the only organization in the US which has for years compiled this data, through both a household and an establishment survey. We had that report last Friday. The US shed 85,000 jobs in Dec/09, bringing the total to 2.7 million jobs lost since the stimulus was passed, and 3.4million since BO became president.
Now BO, if I were you I’d re-think your strategy of treating the masses like rocks. We’re not that dumb and you’re about to get bit in the ass my friend.
Robert Craven
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Insulted?
Don’t like being treated like a child? Bothered a tad that Obama thinks your stupid? You’re a Democrat to boot, yet you’re not insulted? Let us tell you why you should be.
We have known for years that gov’t spending cannot spark the economy. So have most reasonable observers, at least those not on contract to the NYT’s. We predicted mid-09 that BO’s package would be a complete failure, and why. Now it is clear we were right.
However, as the left has never read Einstein’s definition of insanity: "doing the same thing over an over again and expecting different results.," they are ready to do it again. Are they naive, or, is there something more? Is there mischief about?
In fact, most of BO’s cronies know better; that is, they know enough about economic history to know these things don’t work. But, they also know enough about the voter to think they can pull it off again. To the left, to sit still and do nothing - which is exactly what they should do - is simply out of the question. The economy, health, the climate, none of these is an end, all of them a means to their end - the opportunity to expand federal intrusion into the economy and the daily lives of all of us. Like Mac in Steinbeck’s In Dubious Battle, they will even sacrifice their own kind in the process.
July of ‘09 we wrote a series of sketches detailing gov’t intervention and its sure failure, especially focusing on "stimulus" spending. We recommend everyone take the time to review those sketches; there can be no better exercise in understanding reality around current issues. Apparently the AP did just that. Now, even they have has come around! They analyzed what was thought to be one of the healthiest parts of stimulus—spending on roads and bridges—and concluded that the billions in taxpayer dollars have had "no effect on local employment."
Last summer we were "dissed" by a Cornell econ prof. Yep. Robert H. Frank is a Cornell University econ professor and (surprise!) a columnist for the NYT’s. Here is what he had to say about those of us who opposed the so-called stimulus package: "The fact that stimulus opponents are far less numerous, have less distinguished academic credentials, on average, and are far less ideologically diverse than their counterparts does not guarantee they're wrong. But these factors should make rational consumers and investors less likely to side with them." My, my, my, now that hurts. But funny, haven’t heard peep from ‘ol Bob lately have we?
Our last sketch was entitled Fraud. Earlier we called this thing a tragedy. No longer. Fraud is literal, accurate, not hype.
Lawmakers are returning to Wash going into the 2010 midterm elections; job creation is the number one priority. The Dem’s count on the 1) lack of scholarship and 2) amnesia of the masses, esp members of their own party, to create another monster.
Don’t let it happen.
Robert Craven
We have known for years that gov’t spending cannot spark the economy. So have most reasonable observers, at least those not on contract to the NYT’s. We predicted mid-09 that BO’s package would be a complete failure, and why. Now it is clear we were right.
However, as the left has never read Einstein’s definition of insanity: "doing the same thing over an over again and expecting different results.," they are ready to do it again. Are they naive, or, is there something more? Is there mischief about?
In fact, most of BO’s cronies know better; that is, they know enough about economic history to know these things don’t work. But, they also know enough about the voter to think they can pull it off again. To the left, to sit still and do nothing - which is exactly what they should do - is simply out of the question. The economy, health, the climate, none of these is an end, all of them a means to their end - the opportunity to expand federal intrusion into the economy and the daily lives of all of us. Like Mac in Steinbeck’s In Dubious Battle, they will even sacrifice their own kind in the process.
July of ‘09 we wrote a series of sketches detailing gov’t intervention and its sure failure, especially focusing on "stimulus" spending. We recommend everyone take the time to review those sketches; there can be no better exercise in understanding reality around current issues. Apparently the AP did just that. Now, even they have has come around! They analyzed what was thought to be one of the healthiest parts of stimulus—spending on roads and bridges—and concluded that the billions in taxpayer dollars have had "no effect on local employment."
Last summer we were "dissed" by a Cornell econ prof. Yep. Robert H. Frank is a Cornell University econ professor and (surprise!) a columnist for the NYT’s. Here is what he had to say about those of us who opposed the so-called stimulus package: "The fact that stimulus opponents are far less numerous, have less distinguished academic credentials, on average, and are far less ideologically diverse than their counterparts does not guarantee they're wrong. But these factors should make rational consumers and investors less likely to side with them." My, my, my, now that hurts. But funny, haven’t heard peep from ‘ol Bob lately have we?
Our last sketch was entitled Fraud. Earlier we called this thing a tragedy. No longer. Fraud is literal, accurate, not hype.
Lawmakers are returning to Wash going into the 2010 midterm elections; job creation is the number one priority. The Dem’s count on the 1) lack of scholarship and 2) amnesia of the masses, esp members of their own party, to create another monster.
Don’t let it happen.
Robert Craven
Friday, January 8, 2010
FRAUD
More "Stimulus" ? It will not work. We know that, our readers know that, Obama knows that, almost every economist knows that. The difference between most of us and this administration - most of us are not chronically disingenuous.
The latest plan is called a jobs plan, stealth for stimulus. Please. It is in fact another $50 billion in infrastructure spending (e.g., roads, trolleys, trains, and sewer systems). Government infrastructure spending is widely believed by the masses to be a quick ticket to job creation and economic prosperity. That is false. This plan is the administration's attempt to pull another fast one at the expense of all of us. This is a scam designed to take in the masses and appease the left.
We have explained before why these schemes don’t work. Let’s review. The track record of government stimulus is all failure. The New Deal doubled gov’t spending but unemployment remained above 20% until WWII. Japan’s 10 stimulus bills over 8 years had zero impact. The 2009 BO "stimulus" was a flop, exactly as we predicted in this blog.
Why? Start here: Where is the world does this money come from? Thin air? Only if the Fed is in cahoots with the administration. A slush fund put away for such emergencies? Come on. It comes dear readers from areas where it could be put to better use.
So again, from where do these funds arise? Hear the term "crowding out" before? The funds arise from taxes, from inflation, from gov’t borrowing. That’s it. If taxes, Obama is only redistributing existing purchasing power. If from borrowing either from us or from foreigners, there is then exactly that offset in less to invest or spend in the private sector, which is by the way, always more efficient. (Borrowing from China and others will only adjust the balance of payments by equally raising net imports, leaving total demand and output unchanged.)
Haven’t yet accepted the fact you’re being taken? Obama wouldn’t do this to you? Still believe what you hear from labor union types or partisan Nobel laureates? Fine. Don’t take our word for it. How about from the government itself, in this case the Congressional Research Service, which noted, "To the extent that financing new highways by reducing expenditures on other programs or by deficit finance and its impact on private consumption and investment, the net impact on the economy of highway construction in terms of both output and employment could be nullified or even negative."
Look at this example. Obama’s guys claim $1 billion in highway spending can create 47, 576 new jobs. So assume they borrow that money from the private economy (as they claim they intend to do). From the Heritage Foundation, "Highway spending simply transfers jobs and income from one part of the economy to another. The only way that $1 billion of new highway spending can create 47,576 new jobs is if the $1 billion appears out of nowhere as if it were manna from heaven."
The funny thing is, almost no one argues with this. The Dept of Transportation and the GAO confirmed the statement above. Obama’s counting on the lack of scholarship of the masses to get this deal done.
Fellow critics of this fraud argue that it’s like taking water out of one end of a swimming pool and putting into the other. They’re partly right, but that’s only a wash. Most of these programs are in fact a retardant, in that they take a dollar from folks who can spend it productively and give that dollar to those that have demonstrated they can’t.
Think of this the next time you hear Obama harping on stimulus. At least you’ll know up front you’re about to be shorn (ok, this word is a noun, but if Faulker and Twain got away with it, so can we).
Robert Craven
The latest plan is called a jobs plan, stealth for stimulus. Please. It is in fact another $50 billion in infrastructure spending (e.g., roads, trolleys, trains, and sewer systems). Government infrastructure spending is widely believed by the masses to be a quick ticket to job creation and economic prosperity. That is false. This plan is the administration's attempt to pull another fast one at the expense of all of us. This is a scam designed to take in the masses and appease the left.
We have explained before why these schemes don’t work. Let’s review. The track record of government stimulus is all failure. The New Deal doubled gov’t spending but unemployment remained above 20% until WWII. Japan’s 10 stimulus bills over 8 years had zero impact. The 2009 BO "stimulus" was a flop, exactly as we predicted in this blog.
Why? Start here: Where is the world does this money come from? Thin air? Only if the Fed is in cahoots with the administration. A slush fund put away for such emergencies? Come on. It comes dear readers from areas where it could be put to better use.
So again, from where do these funds arise? Hear the term "crowding out" before? The funds arise from taxes, from inflation, from gov’t borrowing. That’s it. If taxes, Obama is only redistributing existing purchasing power. If from borrowing either from us or from foreigners, there is then exactly that offset in less to invest or spend in the private sector, which is by the way, always more efficient. (Borrowing from China and others will only adjust the balance of payments by equally raising net imports, leaving total demand and output unchanged.)
Haven’t yet accepted the fact you’re being taken? Obama wouldn’t do this to you? Still believe what you hear from labor union types or partisan Nobel laureates? Fine. Don’t take our word for it. How about from the government itself, in this case the Congressional Research Service, which noted, "To the extent that financing new highways by reducing expenditures on other programs or by deficit finance and its impact on private consumption and investment, the net impact on the economy of highway construction in terms of both output and employment could be nullified or even negative."
Look at this example. Obama’s guys claim $1 billion in highway spending can create 47, 576 new jobs. So assume they borrow that money from the private economy (as they claim they intend to do). From the Heritage Foundation, "Highway spending simply transfers jobs and income from one part of the economy to another. The only way that $1 billion of new highway spending can create 47,576 new jobs is if the $1 billion appears out of nowhere as if it were manna from heaven."
The funny thing is, almost no one argues with this. The Dept of Transportation and the GAO confirmed the statement above. Obama’s counting on the lack of scholarship of the masses to get this deal done.
Fellow critics of this fraud argue that it’s like taking water out of one end of a swimming pool and putting into the other. They’re partly right, but that’s only a wash. Most of these programs are in fact a retardant, in that they take a dollar from folks who can spend it productively and give that dollar to those that have demonstrated they can’t.
Think of this the next time you hear Obama harping on stimulus. At least you’ll know up front you’re about to be shorn (ok, this word is a noun, but if Faulker and Twain got away with it, so can we).
Robert Craven
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
