Libertarians have long known that FDR's "New Deal" was primarily about banking and that the programs were a smoke screen. FDR used the ancient Roman strategy of bread and circus, small change to the proletarians while the wealthy extract ever larger gains. The bread and circus consisted of inter-generational transfers (from later to earlier generations) and failed attempts to rationalize and re-engineer labor relations and banking. High marginal tax rates and abolition of the gold standard re-enforced government authority over the individual, and during the 48-year Democratic Party reign from 1932 to 1980 the government pursued a bleeding-and-extraction process by which the wealthy extracted the national blood from workers, small business and the poor, using the Federal Reserve Bank as its syringe.
Until the past few years the military-financial-industrial complex was able to keep the public happy with bread and circus; the public's fear of unemployment; and a social security plan that seemed to work until about 10 years ago. The price was massive growth in government waste and special interest extraction, as big business, government employees and most of all the financial community rushed to the public trough to suck productive Americans dry. The Democratic media have lied and covered up this process to the point that Americans now willingly pay 50% of their income for a government that produces S-H-I-T.
The worst of it is yet to come. Both retirement funding and health care will place heavy burdens on the public's pocket book, and the baby boomers are facing a looming gap in both.
The public is seeing itself get poorer as the policies of the Democratic Party turn into the policies of special interest greed. No party in American history has lied more aggressively than the Democratic Party during the Bush years. Damning Bush for greed, the Democrats took power on the promise of change. But their first action was to produce the largest special interest subsidy in the nation's history, exceeding the greed and stupidity even of the Rockefeller Republicans and George W. Bush. The multi-trillion dollar handout to Wall Street, supported by every Democrat, all of whom a few years earlier claimed be concerned with income inequality, is the largest single subsidy to any industry at any time in American history. The Obama bail-out is the largest exercise of greed in the nation's history.
Was the subsidy needed to avert a depression? That claim, which was used to convince some Americans to support the Democrats' exercise of greed, is pap. Most Americans are concerned about depression for one reason: the risk of unemployment. Five trillion dollars was NOT NECESSARY to cover the risk of unemployment. If twenty percent of the 140 million strong workforce or 28 million were out of work (more than double the current number), every one of these people could be paid $30,000 for two years at a cost of about $1.7 trillion, a fraction of the cost of the bailout. Throw in a third year, and the amount goes up to $2.2 trillion, less than half of what the Democrats have spent.
Ah, but that approach would not have ensured that George Soros, Warren Buffett, and Obama's supporters on Wall and Broad could be kept in multi-seven-digit incomes, or that the incompetent Wall Street clowns could be allowed to continue to manage businesses that they do not know how to manage.
The Democrats have become the party of greed. They are the party of the biggest subsidy to the nation's ultra-rich in history. They not just have subsidized the rich. They have subsidized the least productive, least competent group that is also the richest of any group of wealthy in the nation's history.
The Republicans must disown the bailout and fight a good fight to make this a triumph. But some Republicans too are linked to beneficiaries of the bailout--Progressives who would rather sacrifice their party's success than see Wall Street suffer.
It is incumbent upon libertarians, free-market conservatives (the only possible kind), and anyone not motivated by an easy job or special interest benefits, anyone who is NOT A GREEDY DEMOCRAT or a stupid, slobbering Rockefeller Republican, to act.
Americans are getting poorer. Taxes and government waste are on the rise. States like New York are largely Peoples' Republics in which personal and economic freedom have disappeared. Many Americans live the lives of slaves and do not even know it. A person born into slavery does not know what freedom is.
Much of the Democratic strategy has been based on hate--hate for Republicans. The Democrats' obsessive hatred for Republicans is a religion, and the public has been fooled "most of the time" by emotional group-think and misdirected rage. The Progressive Republicans have fed this rage by behaving like...Progressive Republicans. Liberty Republicans need to develop a strategy to overcome the McCain/Bush crew once and for all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think you need to distinguish between the business class, the group of people that are rich by using the market, and the political class, those that use the hand of government to empower themselves. It sounds as though you think all big businesses suck at the teet of government, which may or may not be true. But aside from that, you're mostly right.
You're absolutely right. Not all big business sucks at the government teet. For instance Wal-Mart. I suspect a good guide to how moral businesses are is how severely the media and the neo-Federalists who dominate the Democratic Party criticize them. The more moral the firm the more they are criticized. The ugliest, most depraved businesses that are functional stealing machines, such as Wall Street and the media, are never criticized.
Post a Comment