Free Money Ain’t Free

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo Free-Money_zps4f8011b3.jpg

Census figures show that over a third of Americans are receiving some means tested welfare; i.e., Medicade, food stamps, housing assistance, and other forms of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families as was reported by Fox News in late August. Of course, this is not surprising to anyone paying attention. This so-called recovery which we are told we are experiencing has been very lopsided in favor of the upper income folks and especially the Wall Street crowd. Inflation is low according to the Federal Reserve, but most people are seeing their cost of living go up while income is stagnant or declining. I think it was economist Charles Hugh Smith who said it best a while back: “we are experiencing deflation in things  we don’t need and inflation in the things we do need”. The unemployment rate is falling while the percentage of working age Americans with a job is decreasing. The jobs that are being created these past six years, which the Obama loves to brag about, are not keeping up with population growth and they are disproportionately low-income and/or part-time jobs.

If the politicians and think tanks on the Right have a plan for improving this moribund economy, I’ve not heard it. On the Left, however, “plans” abound from raising minimum wage to guaranteeing a “living wage” to “universal income” to, as reported here at  Asylum Watch, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has written a white-paper proposing that the Fed’s Quantitative Easing program of giving free money to Wall Street be replaced with a program to give free money to the good folks on Main Street. CFR believes this will get the masses spending more and drive up demand, which in turn, will cause employers to expand production and hire more workers. Although the CFR recognizes the inflationary effects of such a program, they believe the Fed could control inflation by carefully increasing interest rates.

But, here’s what the Left doesn’t tell us about their “free money” schemes:

Free Money Ain’t Free!

The Left, of course, never give a moment’s thought to what their give-away programs cost.  I t is worth noting some of these socialist/Marxist are seeing that this peace meal approach is not working and so it is time, they believe, to go all-in and implement a “universal income“, as those at The Week recently did. After a long diatribe on how the policies of the heartless Right only make matters worse and how the policies of the caring Left don’t do enough, they came to this conclusion:

Therefore, one can easily imagine the historical process described by Marx going in reverse. In today’s labor market, where there are still twice as many job seekers as job openings, the constant conservative carping about the “dignity of work” sounds more jarring and vindictive by the day

As someone with a nice, stimulating job, I agree that work can help people flourish. But in an economy that is flatly failing to produce enough jobs to satisfy the need, a universal basic income will start to seem more plausible — even necessary.

Dear friends, you need to take this “free money” talk seriously. As the middle class continues to shrink, this idea is going to gain more traction.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Fortunately for those of us who seek information from alternative sources, there are some very smart people in the blogosphere. That includes my good friend at the Spellchek blog.  (Do yourself a favor and mark his post as a must read!) My friend was inspired by the article at The Week to get out his calculator and put pencil to paper and see what kind of money this idea might entail. He used Switzerland as a base case since they will be voting referendum to provide a universal income of $33,600 per year to their citizens. The using U.S. Census Bureau numbers he began crunching the numbers: (Bold added)

What if we followed the lead of the Swiss and doled out $33,600 per year to each one of us? That equates to over $8.1 trillion dollars annually, just a tad more than the $1 trillion dollar welfare number were arguing about now. With an economy worth an estimated $17.3 trillion annually, a basic income at that level would eat up nearly 50% of everything produced. Except that doesn’t count. Only our federal budget spending does which was only a meager $3.5 trillion last year.

Worse yet, federal revenues were only $2.8 trillion. We borrowed the rest just to spend $3.5 trillion. Can you imagine if we had to cough up $8.1 trillion for a basic income program? In fact, the biggest budget expenditure we have currently is social security at $814 billion last year, or 24% of the budget. A basic income program would be ten times the size of social security.

Redistributing federal budget monies is only a partial solution. Private wealth must be tapped as well (retirement funds anyone?).

This exercise in futility is funny until you realize that so many people are serious about it. I mean, what if we just took the $1 trillion the left claims is pie-in-the-sky and divided that up amongst our 242 million recipients? That’s only $4,124 bucks a year. Think that wouldn’t send the $15 minimum wage crowd over the edge? That’s chump change to them.

The bottom line is that the seemingly eternal quest of the socialists is that spending other people’s money still doesn’t get us to nirvana. If they ever want to get serious about it than the full-fledged approach of communism is the only way. All wealth must be confiscated and handed out to the masses. And we all know how that approach turns out.

Got that? Total federal government spending would be the sum of $8.1 trillion, for the “universal income” and the current spending level of $3.5 trillion, or a total of $11.6 trillion!

Nobody is going to lend US that additional $8.1 trillion, therefore, it will have to be printed, won’t it? So, how high would the Fed have to raise interest rates to keep a lid on inflation? Right! That, as my friend said, leaves communism.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Share

Free Money Dumped From Helicopters: An Idea That Won’t Go Away

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo helicopterbernanke_zpsfba76f73.jpg

{I}n a country (and world) drowning with debt, there are only two options to extinguish said debt: inflate it away or default. Anything else is kicking the can while making the problem even worse.

Zero Hedge

It was none other than the renowned free market capitalist, Milton Friedman, who first postulated the idea that the Federal Reserve should just throw free money from helicopters and let the citizens gather it up and spend it to drive up demand. Friedman made this bizzare proposal (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) in a book he co-authored in 1963, in which he was explaining how the Fed caused and prolonged the Great Depression with their monetary policies. He said the Fed would have been better off to just throw free money out of helicopters. Of course, years later, Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke, was tagged “Helicopter Ben” when he made reference to Friedman’s proposal.

The problem with Bernanke’s helicopter (now Ms. Yellen’s helicopter) is that it only hovers over Wall Street and for six years the only ones to benefit from the Fed’s free money has been Wall Street.

The quote from Zero Hedge at the top of the page comes from an article that tells us that there is now a new entity proposing to keep free money flowing except this entity wants to move the helicopters from Wall Street to Main Street.  Who is this good Samaritan? Believe it or not, the proposal is being made by the most influential and dangerous think-tank mankind has ever known _ the Council on Foreign Relations. Why is the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) making a proposal on monetary policy? That’s a good question and we will endeavor to suggest an answer. CFR published its proposal yesterday in an article with this really catchy  title:

Print Less but Transfer More

Why Central Banks Should Give Money Directly to the People

Wow! Since when has the CFR been a friend of the good folks on Main Street? If you take the time to read the CFR article, believe me, you will find yourself agreeing with almost every point it makes. That’s because the CFR article is a condemnation of everything the Fed (Barnanke and Yellin) have been doing monetarily for the last six years; just like many of us have been writing about since 2008. The Fed’s policy of dumping free money on Wall Street has not produced the promised recovery, has it? And, the CFR makes the point we all agree with that the Fed’s policy has exacerbated the wealth gap in America by making the rich richer. So, what is the CFR  proposing?

Instead of trying to drag down the top, governments should boost the bottom.

Well, all right! There is a populist idea that any politician will love. Notice that it is “governments” plural! The idea is coming from CFR after all.

The beauty of their plan they say is that it doesn’t require Congress go through another battle of whether to raise taxes or cut spending or  even to have to pass some 2000 page bill. It only requires the President or the Treasury Secretary to pick up the phone and call the Fed and make the request to create some new money  that the government coul then pass out to the bottom 80% wage earners (the good folks on Main Street). The CFR says that the Fed would actually be creating new money at a lessor rate than it is now because those lower wage earners will rush out and spend that free money and the economy will see a 1.3 multiplyer effect. Demand for goods and service will rise and employers will hire more workers to keep up with the new demand and the economy, I suppose, will finally reach escape velocity. Who said there’s no such thing as a free lunch?

So, what’s the catch? Won’t all this new free money cause run away inflation? Not to worry says the CFR. The Fed will still have its monetary tools for raising interest rates to combat any signs of inflation. But, the CFR doesn’t think even that will be necessary. They support their argument by point out after six years of Quantitative Easing and Zero Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP), the Fed created trillions of new dollars and there’s been no real inflation.

Oops! That argument, my friends, is pure unadulterated BD (Bovine Droppings). This humble observer of the asylum we all have to live in does not believe and you should not believe that the CFR believes their own BD, for one moment. They definitely know better. The people who make up the CFR may be bent and twisted, but they are not stupid. They know that most of those trillions of funny money are sitting in the excess reserve accounts of the To Big To Fail or Trust Banks. That money has never circulated in the general economy. The banks choose not to take the risk of lending that money for too much risk and too little return (thanks to ZIRP) so they borrow from their own accounts at nearly zero interest and leverage it i the derivatives markets that they themselves manipulate and make  a tonne of money with very little risk. But, when the Fed starts dumping free money on Main Street, it will enter the general economy and it will have an inflationary effect and the Fed will raise interest rates and then the banks will see opportunities for lending these other trillions and yes, my friends, inflation will go into hyper drive. The CFR knows that. The masters behind the curtains, for whom the CFR really works, know that. This will be the last stage of crippling the dollar as the international reserve currency and usher in their plans for a new world reserve currency.

Dear friends, do read the CFR article. It is a masterpiece. It is a work of art. When our Congress critters and our “Redistribute the Wealth” President read this proposal from CFR, they will see the answer to all of their prayers. They will see this idea as mana from heaven. They will fall all over themselves to get this plan implemented.

This free money plan from the CFR will actually work. It will do all the wonderful things they say it will do. It will work and it will keep working right up to the day it doesn’t work anymore; when inflation goes hyper.

Enjoy the ride, my friends, But, know this. Once the ride starts, there will be no getting off until the bitter end.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Share

We Feel Poorer Because We ARE Poorer

Share

went-broke-becoming-middle-class

Today’s post complements yesterday’s post in which we talked about the faux recovery America has experienced since the so-called Great Recession of 2008. Monty Pelerin’s World has posted a graph and a chart that demonstrate clearly why most Americans are having a harder time making ends meet today than they were a decade or so ago. The following graph shows that most working
Americans have seen their nominal income increase over the last 14 years; but their real income after taxes and inflation has fallen by about 9% on average.

medianincome

A fortunate few have earned promotions every three or four years and as a result their quality of life has improved. Everyone else and especially those on fixed incomes have taken a serious beating.

The Federal Reserve has been telling the public for years that inflation is a non-issue. For the average American, this chart shows clearly just how big of an issue inflation really is.

costoflivingxpenses-7-1-14

The road to the new world order is, I fear, a dark and dreary one.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Share

America Has A 1.6% Inflation Rate. Aren’t You Lucky?

Share

In the Socialist Paradise where I live, inflation (as reported by the government) was 56% last year. This year the projects are for an inflation of 85% or more. But, you, my dear friends, don’t have an inflation problem back there in America, do you? I Googled US Inflation this morning and found this graph:

United States Inflation Rate

Wow! 1.6% inflation last month. I guess those blood-sucking Social Security recipients (like me) won’t being getting any adjustment to their benefits this year. Unfortunately, according to this article, those fixed-income blood-suckers and most everyone else are going to be in for some sticker shock and the grocery store very shortly. (Keep in mind that the government’s reported inflation rate does not take into effect price changes in volatile things like food or gasoline.) Take a look at what is happening to these food commodities so far this year:

Cattle              Hogs               Grains             Milk                Coffee

+28%              +25%              14%                +17%              +67%

Those increases should up in what you pay a the grocery store in April and May.

Why are these food commodity prices on the rise? The article linked above suggest it is due to speculators using the Feds easy money as the cause. I’m not buying that. The Fed’s Zero Interest Rate Policy( ZIRP) has been in effect for nearly five years now and the source the author used for the above table shows that these commodity prices were either flat or falling for all that time until just recently.  It is more likely due to normal supply and demand factors than anything else.

At any rate, your 1.6% inflation rate is about to bite you in the …

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Asylum Watch

Share

Cash for Clunkers Revisited: More Damage Done

Share

cash-for-clunkers

For those of you that have been here since almost the beginning, you know that we pegged “Cash for Clunkers” as the huge failure that it was.  Here is what we wrote while the program was ongoing…

The cars traded in on the program are to be destroyed.  Now, in normal situations, a trade in will either go on the dealer lot, go to auction, or go to the junkyard.  In any of those situations, others will have the opportunity to benefit from this car, either by driving it, or by purchasing the usable parts from it.  When the car is destroyed, there is little benefit.  Or is there?  I wrote here about how the new Secretary of Transportation wants to “coerce” people out of their cars and onto public transportation.  Here are some quotes…

The moderator of the press club event asked LaHood: “Some in the highway-supporters motorist groups have been concerned by your livability initiative. Is this an effort to make driving more torturous and to coerce people out of their cars?”

LaHood answered: “It is a way to coerce people out of their cars.

 

And some more…

Lahood then made a joke about the fact that some conservatives believe that the way he wants to use the Department of Transportation represents an increased government intrusion in people’s lives.

“Some conservative groups are wary of the livable communities program, saying it’s an example of government intrusion into people’s lives,” said the moderator. “How do you respond?”

“About everything we do around here is government intrusion in people’s lives,” said LaHood. “So have at it.”

“So have at it.”  Pretty cavalier attitude regarding manipulating the public into a pre-arranged goal, isn’t it?

In the “Cash for Clunkers” plan, how many cars will be taken out of the market?  How many fewer Americans will be able to own a used car due to this?  New cars that are to be made to the messiah’s specifications will be more and more expensive.  To reach the mileage and emissions goals, more, newer technology will have to go in, increasing the cost.  With so many used cars sent to the crusher, where will people go for a car when they cannot afford the newer ones?  Funded with $1,000,000,000, the initial plan was to scrap 250,000 cars.  The congress wants to add another $2,000,000,000 to the plan, does that mean a total of 750,000 cars?   How many people will that “coerce” onto public transportation?

That was in August of 2009.

Here is what we said a little more than a year later…

 

I think we have the answer to my last question, courtesy of Ed Morrissey at Hot Air.

In other words, there was real and rational demand for the cars that the Obama administration sent to the grinders.  That demand hasn’t stopped, even if tainted with political incorrectness.  The top four vehicles for price increases in Edmunds’ used-car tracking are all high-end, larger cars or SUV:

Cadillac Escalade – 35.6% increase
Chevy Suburban – +34.2%
Dodge Grand Caravan – +34%
BMW X5 – +33%

As predicted last year, the people most hurt by the price increases are those who can least afford them.  The used-car market usually attracts people who need transportation on a budget, who cannot afford to buy new.   By destroying a quarter’s worth of trade-ins in three weeks and permanently taking them off the market, the Obama administration has forced an artificial inflation by supply restriction.  Moreover, they did so by subsidizing new-car sales that would have occurred anyway, eating up three billion dollars in taxpayer money.

In other words, the White House spent $3 billion to make used cars more expensive for working-class families.  Nice work.

I’m not claiming to have a gigantic brain with super -predictive powers.  Anyone with half a brain could see this coming.  However, the folks in DC are lacking that half brain, or any other, for that matter.  There is even more for the post mortem on “cash for clunkers.”  Freedomworks has more…

“Cash for Clunkers” allowed drivers to trade their old gas-guzzler for up to $4,500 towards the purchase of a sparkly new green machine. Progressive pundits hailed it as a foolproof win/win/win: The anemic auto industry would sell cars, broke customers would get a sweet deal, and Gaia herself would breathe easier at America’s crystal-clear skies.

Alas, reality begged to differ:

[Cash for Clunkers] created a dearth of used cars, artificially driving up prices. For those who needed an affordable car, but didn’t qualify for the program, this increase in price meant affordable transportation was well out of reach. It also meant used-car dealers, most of whom are independently owned, small-business owners, had little to no stock. According to Smith, 122 Virginia dealers chose not to renew their licenses after that year.

If 122 dealers were put out of business in one state alone, just imagine the damage nationally. And help to the consumer was illusory. The artificial trade-in bonus helped people who couldn’t qualify for a new car loan get saddled with debt they had no hope of repaying. Once financial reality — and higher insurance rates — kicked in, many saw their cars repossessed and their credit ruined. Ultimately, they traded in their affordable ride for a daily bus ticket.

And, there is even worse new from the greenie front…

E – The Environmental Magazine gravely notes that Cash for Clunkers produced tons of unnecessary waste while doing almost nothing to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Shredding vehicles results in its own environmental nightmare. For each ton of metal produced by a shredding facility, roughly 500 pounds of “shredding residue” is also produced, which includes polyurethane foams, metal oxides, glass and dirt. All totaled, about 4.5 million tons of that residue is already produced on average every year. Where does it go? Right into a landfill.

E Magazine states recycling just the plastic and metal alone from the CARS scraps would have saved 24 million barrels of oil. While some of the “Clunkers” were truly old, many of the almost 700,000 cars were still in perfectly good condition. In fact, many that qualified for the program were relatively “young,” with fuel efficiencies that rivalled newer cars.

So, it cost jobs, and was even worse for the environment.  And everyone saw that, but they did it anyway.  It looked good, and it “felt” good, so it really didn’t matter if it actually made things worse.

Once again, Quinn’s First Law is proven…

 

Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it’s stated intent. 

Share

Pain is a powerful motivator

Share

If you believe polls, most show President Obama with a slight edge over Mitt Romney going into the debates.  This edge has left many pundits scratching their heads wondering how Obama can even be in this race.  After all he has presided over one of the worst economic recoveries in our nation’s history.  Unemployment has been over eight percent for three and a half years, we have lost our triple A credit rating, slipped from first to seventh in global competitiveness, increased our national debt by $6 trillion with nothing to show for it, lost 662,000 jobs to China since 2008, and the list goes on and on.  Jimmy Carter presided over an economy that had in average unemployment rate of 5.8 percent in 1979 and lost big to Ronald Reagan.  So how can President Obama even be in this race with these horrible economic stats?  The answer in my opinion is simple.  When people don’t feel the pain of the above economic numbers they have no desire to change the current course.

Here’s what I mean.  When I was in Pennsylvania a few weeks ago I ran into a large number of people who were out of work, collecting some type of assistance.  They had enough money for food, rent, cable TV, cigarettes, beer, and all the time in the world to enjoy it.  When I asked them who they were leaning towards in the 2012 election, overwhelmingly they supported reelecting Obama.  This shouldn’t surprise anyone.  They’re not feeling the pain of this terrible economy.  Like a drug, they’re high on entitlements and nothing else matters.  They don’t care about the national debt or the high unemployment rates because it doesn’t impact them.  They don’t care about QE3 because they don’t understand it and have little desire to understand it.  They don’t care where the money is coming from, just as long as the checks keep coming.  They have zero motivation to change their condition because all their basic needs are being met.  So why would they support any candidate that threatens their lifestyle.  The answer is they won’t.  Now multiply this same scenario across the country and a picture begins to come into focus as to why Obama is still in this race.

This is not like the Jimmy Carter economy.  Back then people were actually feeling the pain of a bad economy and they had a strong desire to change their condition.  They wanted to work and knew that work was an avenue that would improve their condition.  They weren’t buying what Jimmy Carter was selling because they were dealing with the reality of his economy every day.  They were feeling the pain of inflation and the falling dollar and pain is a powerful motivator.  Today the pain is being felt by those who go to work every day trying to stretch a devalued dollar to make ends meet.  They pay taxes that are redistributed to another segment of society that pays little to no taxes and lives off the system.  These are the people who feel the pain at the pumps as more of their hard earned money siphoned from them and transferred from the private sector to the government.  Those who do not feel any of the above pains and live off a system that is on the verge of collapsing simply do not care about changing the course.  And the sad truth is that there are a great number of people living off the system; a system that relies on dependency and one that President Obama helped cultivate.

I do believe smoke and mirror tactics will only work so long for Obama.  Lying in campaign ads will catch up to him because eventually he will run smack into the economic reality he has created for all of us and that reality is painful.  And like I said pain is indeed a power motivator.  Use it against him on Election Day.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Original Post:  The Sentry Journal

Share

Arthur Laffer: Economic Statistics, Some Matter and Some Are Deceiving

Share

At Real Clear Politics the other day, I came across an article by economist, Arthur Laffer in theWall Street Journal. the same Arthur Laffer whom developed the Laffer Curve during the Reagan administration. As I often do, I scanned the article and bookmarked it as a possible source for a post. Then this morning I had an e-mail in my in-box from Pat Slattery of The Free Market Projectsuggesting that I consider doing a post on an article by John Hayward about the Laffer article. And, I thank him. So, I will discuss both the Laffer and Hayward articles in today’s post on economic statistics.

Economic Statistics that Deceive

With good reason, we mere mortals, without a PhD, have to wonder if government agencies and politicians, including the President, are lying to us. Well, of course, they lie to us. That is a given. But, when it comes government generated statistics, they don’t so much lie to us as they don’t tell us all that we need to know. In other words, they tend to cherry-pick data to put the economy in the best possible. With today’s economy, that is more difficult than usual.

One example of government cherry-picking data is the reported inflation rate. According to the Federal Reserve, inflation is negligible. We know that is not true. The reason reported inflation appears low is that they do not include price changes in oil, gasoline, and food. The items that impact the budgets of 90% of the  population the most are not included in the calculation of inflation.

Anther example of the government only telling us part of the story are the monthly employment numbers. I watched a news video the other day Debbie Whatshername-Schultz say how proud she was of Obama because under his leadership we have had 29 consecutive months of job growth. PROUD!  Give me a break.! The workforce participation rate is getting smaller by the month! The July jobs report announced that non-farm jobs increased in July by 163,000. This was more than what was expected. The stock market went wild.  If you want to know what really happened with the jobs market, check out this article at PJ  Media and this article at Inform the Pundits. You will find out that there was a net loss of jobs in July. Just ask yourself why the unemployment rate increased to 8.3%?

So, with all the efforts to put our economy in the best possible light, our GDP is growing at an abysmal rate of 1.5%. That is pathetic! Let’s find out why our economy is so anaemic.

Some Economic Statistics Matter

The Obama administration, more than any administration in my memory, has based their economic policies on nothing more than tax and spend. Obama has set the all time record for government spending “crapweasels” like Paul Krugman and Democrats in general and the main stream media keep calling for more and more stimulus. (Crapweasel is a term Kurt Silverfiddlealways uses when referring to Paul Krugman.  It fits.)

One of the best ways to measure the success or failure of an economic policy is to look at the empirical results where that policy has been tried. This is exactly what Arthur Laffer has done and reports on his findings in this Wall Street Journal article and suggest that:

Policy makers in Washington and other capitals around the world are debating whether to implement another round of stimulus spending to combat high unemployment and sputtering growth rates. But before they leap, they should take a good hard look at how that worked the first time around.

Dr. Laffer looked at 34 countries that implemented stimulus programs after the 2008 financial crisis. The results weren’t very stimulating:

It worked miserably, as indicated by the table nearby, which shows increases in government spending from 2007 to 2009 and subsequent changes in GDP growth rates. Of the 34 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations, those with the largest spending spurts from 2007 to 2009 saw the least growth in GDP rates before and after the stimulus.

There is a table in Laffer’s article show just badly stimulus worked for these countries. John Hayward in his Human Events’ article about the Laffer report, like this quote from Laffer:

Often as not, the qualification for receiving stimulus funds is the absence of work or income – such as banks and companies that fail, solar energy companies that can’t make it on their own, unemployment benefits and the like. Quite simply,government taxing people more who work and then giving more money to people who don’t work is a surefire recipe for less work, less output and more unemployment.

” a surefire recipe for less work, less output, and more  unemployment.” This reminds me of a conversation back in the eighties, to which I was present, between brother-in-law and two of his friends. They were all UAW members and employees of the Chevrolet plant in Flint, Michigan. They were all in their middle fifties and they had been doing some sharp penciling about whether it made sense for them to take early retirement at age 58.  They concluded that with their General Motor’s pensions and Social Security (in those days you could opt for early Social Security at a reduced rate at 58) that it made no sense to keep working 40 hour weeks for just a few hundred dollars more. I’m thinking that the same thinking applies to many of our citizens on welfare and other government assistance. They are likely figuring why should they take a forty-hour a week job when they can do nothing for only a few hundred dollars less..

John Hayward would add something to Laffer’s analysis:

The other obfuscating factor I would add to Laffer’s analysis is that government spending is treated as highly significant by the media, while private investment is either ignored or criticized.  The financial papers might carry tales of business success, and once in a while the public imagination is captured by a company like Apple… but none of that compares to the front-page, above-the-fold coverage given to huge government spending initiatives.

We know what Obama and his team are up to. With the support of the main stream media, they want to pull the wool over the eyes of those that still have a job (the majority of voters) by convincing them that the economy, however slowly, is steadily growing and now is no to change horses. Economic statistics do matter and it is going to be up to us, the conservative bloggers, to get the truth out there.  It won’t come from the media, that is for sure.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:Conservatives on Fire

Share

Food Prices Rise Under Obama

Share

Hope and Change apparently means higher food prices.  Big Government has the evidence…

So you think you’ve been paying more for groceries because your food bill is too high?

You’re right. Barack Obama is consuming fine dining while you’re putting another helping of macaroni on your plate. In 2011, with Obama’s inflation beginning to hit, prices skyrocketed for staples that you consume, according to the government:

  • Beef: +10.2%
  • Pork: +8.5%
  • Fish: +7.1%
  • Eggs: +9.2%
  • Dairy: +6.8%
  • Oils and Fats: +9.3%

Thanks to those kinds of prices, more and more people are opting to stay home for dinner – restaurants are simply too expensive. The gap between how much Americans eat out and how much they eat at home is the biggest since the mid-1970’s oil crisis.

These, of course, will have a disproportionate impact on the poor and middle class.  Once again, it shows how little this administration cares for those two segments of the population.  But, I wonder how many from each will vote for Obama, so he can do even more, “hope and change.”

To those who will vote for the empty suit in November, I can only ask one thing…

How ya likin’ that change?

Share

Price of Bacon Soars!

Share

Kevin Bacon is now more expensiveThe Department of Agriculture announced today that because of a sharp rise in corn prices, Bacon is expected to be “dramatically more expensive” this summer.

With the announcement consumers have begun cutting back on their Bacon usage.

“I used to have Kevin Bacon cut my lawn once a week.  He was cheap.  Ten dollars was all it cost” said one person.  “But now I don’t know.  The economy’s bad and I’m struggling to make ends meet. If Bacon gets more expensive I’ll have to mow it myself even though I have a bad back.”

All along this row of houses former neatly manicured lawns have been growing wild as owners are forced to choose between not mowing their lawn or paying extra for Bacon.

“The last time I had Bacon mow my lawn I gave him his usual ten dollars and he said ‘Sorry, price has gone up’ and he asked for 25.  I told him I couldn’t afford that and that’s when he shrugged and said ‘What can I do.  Homie loves corn’ “ said one anguished home owner.  “It’s a shame.  He was so good at mowing my lawn.”

One elderly woman caught unawares by the rise in Bacon prices used to have Kevin Bacon carry her groceries from her car to the kitchen every week.

“He only wanted five dollars and he was such a nice young man.  But last week he asked for $15.  When I said I didn’t have it he threw my groceries to the ground and punched me in the face.  I’m an old woman. Was that appropriate?”

Another man laments, “I used to have Bacon work on my car.  I just don’t have the time.  I used to give him $50.  But yesterday he told me he was going to charge $200.  I just don’t have that kind of  money.  I told him that.  So he took the alternator and beat my cat to death with it. I mean I know we all have to make a living but come on!”

When asked to respond to complaints that the rise in his prices will have a negative effect on the average American Kevin Bacon had this to say: “Look if you want my services, and I provide top-notch professional services, you’re going to have to pay.  Look, don’t blame me.  Blame the corn producers.”

He then crushed a small child to death with his bare hands.

“I get cranky when I don’t have my corn.”

Original Post:  Manhattan Infidel

Share

Democratic Strategy for 2012 Revealed? MSM Concentrating on Social Issues, Avoiding Economy

Share

I picked up on this in the CNN debate, and the saw a story from Catholibertarian that shows a possible campaign strategy for 2012.  In both examples, it seemed as if an inordinate amount of time was spent on the social issues; abortion and gay marriage, when compared with the most pressing issue of the day-the economy.  It would be my estimation that more people are concerned with the following:

1.  They don’t have a job.

2.  They fear losing the job they have.

4.  They can’t afford gas for their cars.

5.  Inflation is causing prices to rise across the board.

Again, it’s my guess, but I would think that more people are concerned with what happens at the gas pump or the checkout line than they do about gay marriage.  For the most part, their own lives are being impacted by Obama’s policies, not gay rights.

And there in lies the rub.  It’s increasingly impossible to defend or cover up Obama’s failures (or are they successes?), so the MSM will simply change the subject and discuss something else.  That, of course, will fail.  They can say whatever they want,  ignore anything they don’t want released, or try to spin it, but no matter what-people know what’s wrong then they open their wallets to pay for something.  No amount of lying or obfuscation will change that.

But that won’t keep them from trying.  And, it gives us yet another opportunity to watch them fall on their swords for Obama-and let the entire world know about it.

It ought to be fun.

Share

A Fun Way to go on the Offensive

Share

Ever want to do something to raise awareness about the POTUS and his policies?  I know, most of the readers here are bloggers as well, and we help to get the message out, but what if there was a very public, yet anonymous way to do it?  Well, dear readers, such a technique has been found, and I think you’ll find it to be as hilariously subversive as I do.

For background, here is a description of subversion techniques from Stop Shouting…

Part of the charade employed by the existing Regime is to continue to make people believe that they are alone in their dissent and/or dissatisfaction with the ruling class. They need to isolate you and make you feel YOU are the outlier. A recent example is the derision lobbed at those who questioned Obama’s background and credentials.

This has been written about extensively in various professional military training manuals. It has also been the subject of many papers, dissecting the evolution of an underground movement that overthrew an entrenched Regime, where to outsiders, the “sudden collapse” of an oppressive regime catches them by surprise, when in fact, it was predictable all along.

The reason for the “sudden collapse” is that the group knowledge finally reached a tipping point, where the “dissenters” realize that they are the MAJORITY, not the minority as the Regime would have them believe.

Sticky notes, as advocated at gas pumps and on stores shelves, represent what is known as “Counter propaganda”.

They also have TEN RULES FOR LIBERTY GUERRILLAS, in their post, I strongly recommend that you read them.

For some examples, I lifted these from Doug Ross…

So, check out the Facebook page for this effort, and participate, if you like.  It sounds like fun, and it’ll spread the word.

 

Share

Gas Prices Start to hit $4 a Gallon: Will this Hurt Obama?

Share

According to MSNBC, via the AP, gas prices in several states have topped $4 a gallon, with more join…

On Sunday, the Empire State became the sixth state to top $4 for the average price of a gallon of gas, joining Alaska, California, Connecticut, Hawaii and Illinois, according to AAA’s Daily Fuel Gauge. The average price of gas also rose to more than $4 per gallon in Washington, D.C., on Saturday.

The next states to join the list could be Michigan, which has gas for $3.95 per gallon on average, and Indiana, where the average price is $3.94. Nevada, Washington and Wisconsin are close behind.

The national average for gas has increased for 26 straight days, and is now at $3.83 per gallon. That’s up 29 cents from a month ago. Retail surveys suggest motorists are reacting to higher prices now by buying less fuel. Still, the government expects pump prices to keep climbing this summer as vacationers take to the highways.

Back in 2008, then President Bush was savaged by the left and media (or do I repeat myself?) for the high gas prices.  Now, it seems that Obama is immune to such criticism.  However, with Obama’s fiscal policies causing inflation, and his energy policies increasing prices, he is handing the GOP some priceless ammunition to use against him.  Come election time, people are going to look at the price at the pump, as well as at the grocery store.  Hitting people where they live will overcome political dogma for most.  Hopefully, the GOP won’t screw it up.

Share