High Prices and Recession, Thanks to BHO

When the government wants to spend more, the GCP (Government Controlled Press) comes out with stories that there is no inflation and in fact there is deflation. The Fed chief, who serves at the pleasure of BHO, may make similar statements. Therefore, say the talking heads, in this environment, government deficit spending is OK.

This blog has stated that the huge increases in government spending create money. Since there is no corresponding increase in good and services to spend the money on, this is certainly inflation. That prices don’t go up is explained by the severe economic downturn. Markets are attempting to clear, that is to sell goods and services and produce more. This is not happening because the inflation is not allowing prices to adjust downward, as is the usual way slow markets clear. The result is a more and more sluggish economy. Based upon the actions of this government, a sluggish economy seems to be what they want, except at election time.

The Great Mystery

In spite of the monumental events of these turbulent times, this blog has not featured many posts of late. Blogger in chief, actually the only blogger, Jean-Baptiste, has been busy with other matters. It is not because he has been overwhelmed by the onslaught of the popular press, such as the incessant frivolities from the trivial triumvirate of syndicate columnists, David Brooks, E.J. Dionne Jr., and David Sirota. It is true that untwisting the truth from their daily barrages against conservatism and their progressive propaganda would be a full-time job. Lately, they have repeated the big lie that BHO is actually moderate. Glen, Mark, Laura, Sean, and Rush along with their guests have gone to enormous lengths to show that he is our most radically leftist president in history. (Jean-Baptiste suspected this all along.) Also see David Limbaugh's book, Crimes Against Liberty, for a rundown of the evidence against BHO.

Actually, Jean-Baptiste has been meditating on the 'gods of the copybook headings.' Who are they? Kipling's poem says that they are not the market place. That leaves the Progressives as the primary suspect. Anyway, read the past blogs on The Overton Window, or Glen Beck's book itself for an explanation of what all that is about. Kipling's poem gives some insight into the motives of these 'god-like' progressives, delving into the 'Great Mystery.' The Great Mystery is: why do they keep doing it, why can't they just leave us alone? Is it their depraved greed and lust or some mental defect?

Anyway, Jean-Baptiste also had a garden and berry bushes to cultivate and harvest during the Summer. He had cats, birds, and raccoons to take care of. He had a lot of work to do outside. He had his stamp collection to work on. He even had to get away a little. Lately,he was also reading the Koran. The part where God says, 'remember me, I will remember you,' seems to fathom some unknowable depth. The first words of every chapter are, 'In the name of God, the beneficent, the merciful.' Beneficent means He gives us more that we deserve, merciful means that He punishes us less that we deserve. Christian mystics have said they pray incessantly, by saying the Jesus prayer with every breath: 'Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me.' The Islamic mystics repeat: 'There is no God but God." For the less theistic: 'There is no Reality but the Ultimate Reality.'

It can be a little tough to stay focused on the current convoluted progressive schemes of Axelrod, Emanuel, BHO, and their masters.

Washington State Demos Support BHO Agenda (Openly)

The local television campaign ads may not be examples of all that is wrong with American politics, but they are not far from it. Democrat Senator Patty Murry says that Dino Rossi is a pawn of big corporations, especially Wall Street. To prove it, she plays a short clip in which Dino says he would vote to repeal the Wall Street Reform Bill. He should have said he would repeal the Wall Street so-called reform bill. Obviously no one is against reform but he opposes the bill for what is in it, not for its title. The bill is over 2,000 pages of who knows what. Like the other bills passed by the sitting Democrats with the help of a few Rinos, it enacts into law more of the socialistic, state control agenda of the far left.

This blog and many others along with talk radio have explained some of the aims of recent Wall Street take-over attempts by government. The Party's primary purpose is to funnel power and money to the constituent groups of Barack Obama and his leftist associates, and Wall Street is where the power and money is. Mr. Rossi should obviously want it repealed. Unfortunately, his message is, "Our problems did not start yesterday, but I will start fixing them tomorrow." A Tea Party candidate would go to the the heart of the current debate and point out that Democrat Party socialistic policies are what caused our problems. In other states, the Democrat candidates are facing that kind of opposition and respond by disavowing their support of Obama / Pelosi / Ried. Unfortunately, almost all these 'blue dog' Democrats vote with their party when they are back in Washington, DC. In Washington State, the Demo's don't have to distance themselves from their Masters in the other Washington.

It is Interesting

When liberals want to introduce the latest talking point into the conversation, they often start by saying, "It is interesting that..." I guess that is because they want to cast aspersions without thoroughly looking at all sides of an issue. For example, "It is interesting that we had a budget surplus under Bill Clinton but not under Ronald Reagan." They know they cannot support the conclusion that they want to imply, i.e. that Clinton benefited the economy.

Isn't it also interesting to hear government functionaries and the press attack the Reverend who is going to burn Korans after they just finished supporting the mosque at ground zero. It seems that the same statement that it is allowed under our constitution, though it may be unwise and insensitive applies to both actions. The argument is advanced by the left, with rare exceptions, for the mosque but not the Koran burner.

I suppose that the two proposals are materially distinguishable, but I do not need to go there. My issue and question is this: If the reverend agrees not to burn the Korans, what will the radical Muslims do in return? Stop blowing up Innocent people maybe? What about other, nonviolent Muslims, will they do anything about the radical killers in their midst? We could certainly use more vehemence from Muslims directed against those who murder in the name of their religion.

BHO and Demos Not Even Trying

According to the economic theories of Ludvig von Mises, it is impossible for government officials to make efficient economic decisions. That is because their decision making process cannot duplicate the millions of individual decisions made every day by buyers and sellers in the market for consumer and industrial goods. Only the marketplace can evaluate the constantly shifting and interdependent wants and needs of consumption and production. This is referred to as the economic calculations argument for the free market.

Mises concludes that the market, therefore, best supplies the most urgent needs of humanity. Others have argued that the government can indeed calculate the important economic choices that lead to the optimum satisfaction of human needs. Unfortunately, with the progressive mind set at work, such attempts at providing for our most urgent needs are seldom even attempted. Instead, huge amounts of resources are devoted to very limited ends. These narrow goals are based upon the theories, dreams, visions, and whims (not to mention profits), of small special interest groups. The long term consequences of their actions are inadequately evaluated. What we generally get is wasteful expenditure and a situation that is ultimately worse than it would have been without any government intervention.

Little wonder that none of the recent schemes have improved the economy. The situation is like that in France when Bastiat was moved to say, "We have tried everything else, why not try the easiest of all, freedom." That is why this blog listed that quotation as one of the first posts. When will they ever learn?

Still more Chickenshit

I was considering renaming this blog. Unfortunately, due to recent developments, that seems a little premature.

I have not posted here for a month. That's not because there has been nothing to write about. On the contrary, reading the local paper and other mainline media, there seems to be a great need to set the record straight. In fact, there seems to be so much misinformation and disinformation that it is hard to know where to begin. The tactic of the mainstream press seems to be to overwhelm the debate. By the time there is a response, they have moved on to promulgate some other factoid (something that sounds like a fact but not necessarily is) or error in reasoning. That's why Rush calls them the drive bys.

One example of an error in reasoning is represented by a proposition that has been often repeated of late. To wit: high levels of taxation are good for the economy. Hilary Clinton said so and now all the liberals are saying it. I guess that's what they mean by a talking point. Their proof of this is that during the Clinton administration, we had much higher income tax rates for the highest brackets. During that period, we had balanced federal budgets, even surpluses, and economic growth. This is an example of the post hoc fallacy. That is an error in reasoning involving the inference that if one event follows another, the first event must have caused the second. (The full name is post hoc ergo propter hoc -- after that, therefore on account of that.)

This is where the difficulties in unravelling this claims come in. I have not checked the economic data so I do not know if it was taxes collected from these higher tax brackets that brought about a healthy federal budget and economy (I doubt it). I seem to recall that Republican, Newt Gingrich was speaker of the Republican dominated House of Representatives. He proposed his 'contract with America,' which the press called a 'contract on America.' The House cut all of Clinton's spending proposals. They passed Welfare Reform over his multiple vetoes. In other words, Clinton was dragged to a balanced budget kicking and screaming. This and the fact that not many people paid the high income tax rates due to various tax avoidance strategies was probably what happened. As I said, I need to do some more research. This is one reason why the Austrian School believes that theories based upon mathematical economic analysis are mainly invalid. Statistics can show what happened but but not why. Common sense reasoning based upon observation of human behavior can tell us more.

Much more has been happening in the politicoeconomical realm. There's the Mosque at ground zero and its opponents, who the press portray as conservative bigots. There's the fed's plan to monetize the debt (which this blog said would eventually happen in an attempt to support the dollar.) There's the talk of further stimulus bills; the liberal talking point is that we have really not tried this yet, there was only the Bush (and therefore totally wrong headed and ineffective) TARP spending plan. Seems to me I recall a lot of Obama attempts at stimulus spending also, not to mention bailout/payoffs (e.g. to the auto workers). Just lately, there was the 'teacher bail-out.' This was a multi billion federal payment to the states so they could avoid cutting teacher salaries. Along with the funds come a federal mandate not to cut education spending by the states that accept the aid, including in subsequent years. (Seems there was a post about that here; Washington State did not want money offered earlier because of the strings attached.)

There has been much on the encouraging side as well. David Limbaugh's latest book catalogues the setbacks to liberty suffered by this nation due to the Obama policies. The book apparently addresses many of the catastrophic events that have lately befallen us; even an entire book is not nearly enough. Another recent happening was Glenn Beck's 'Restoring Honor' rally in Washington, DC. I wish I could have been there.

Anti-Global Warming Scientist Site

Dr. Spenser is one of those non-existent scientist who does not believe in man made global warming. Al Gore and his pals have said over and over and over that there is no legitimate scientific opposition to their global warming view. Even the supreme court bought the argument of the cap-and-trade crowd, not that they even tried to get the facts. The press of course repeats it every chance they get. Chickenshit to the max.

I try to take a look at Dr. Spenser's site as often as I can"

http://www.drroyspencer.com/