BEFORE You Pass the Unemployment Extension!

Unemployment is the new-old hot button issue that is all over the news again since we finally corked the oil spill in the Gulf for the time being. This is also a topic that affects far more Americans directly, so naturally, it is back on the front burner before Congress takes their August recess.  Today it is looking like we are going to get the extension passed without any consideration for how it will be paid for, or what it will even accomplish.

There is one talking point I would like clarified by our friends on the left: has the stimulus been successful, or are we in a dire situation? We cannot have it both ways, and yet, President Obama and his cabinet would like you to believe that the stimulus was successful while at the same time lecturing the Republicans on the reasonableness of passing the unemployment extension because we are in a crisis (and God knows, this Administration won’t let any crisis go to waste!). You can’t have your cake and eat it too, although, we are supposed to eat ours.

So which is it? Those of us with a more Conservative (or rugged individualism) proclivity are likely to say, “a year for unemployment benefits is ample time! Suck it up and get a job!” Those of us who may be more mindful of taking care of our fellow man (or, at least forcing others to do so through government so we don’t have to do the dirty work ourselves) might argue, “there are no jobs, what are they supposed to do?”

Taking only one side of this issue leaves one without a complete understanding of our present crisis’ gestalt. There are certainly a number of situations where people have been using unemployment benefits to subsidize their sloth; while one cannot take away from the fact that some areas of a state simply have no infrastructure for job growth. You cannot deny that the job situation has gotten worse, the New York Times has an interactive map that shows the growing unemployment rates state by state and how they climbed over time. Furthermore, the Bureau of Labor Statistics does not show a particularly peachy picture of jobs to come, considering at the present moment there are five Americans competing for every one job.

I know it won’t happen, but there are two things I would like to see done if Congress and the President are to pass the Emergency Unemployment Benefits Extension:

First, I cannot imagine why we can’t find a way to pay for it. Emergency unemployment benefits are not paid by the employer during the worker’s tenure, it comes straight out of thin air thanks to the Federal government’s Nietzschean ability to posit something from nothing; in this case, create money and with it, value. The Federal government sets aside a block grant to the state, whose Department of Labor hands out the benefits accordingly. Our Federal deficit stands at a paltry $1.6 Trillion dollars this year, as projected by the administration. The Unemployment bill that is set to pass today will add yet another $36 Billion to our gluttonous budget, and all the Republicans and a few Blue-Dogs ask for is a means to pay for it… part of it? Half of it? Any of it? Somebody please go to YouCut and find one of those programs that Representative Cantor’s office has bulls-eyed and we could have this extension paid for.

Secondly, I’ve already hinted to it earlier in the piece, but the Wall Street Journal has an article about stimulating unemployment where a crazy correlation was made: “A 2006 NBER study by Raj Chetty of UC Berkeley on a related subject begins, ‘It is well known that unemployment benefits raise unemployment durations.’” Imagine that: incentivizing people to not get jobs, and then telling them “well instead of getting a job call your Congressman and ask him or her to extend unemployment benefits” would lead people to strive for nothing. That’s as stupid as setting time-tables in a war. Nevertheless, if we are going to do this last emergency extension, why the hell would we not get something out of it in return? Why not ask of people (and I say ask now, but rather, I’d be much more willing to demand it as part of the prerequisite for receiving such benefits) to help out their community? I would make it mandatory for people to volunteer at least 20 hours of their week towards their community, state or nation in exchange for their free benefits (because we must remember, that they did not pay into this unemployment pool). This would allow people to create at least some value from their benefits outside of paying for the bare necessities that had to be paid for already. Giving money away doesn’t add value; but giving money to people in exchange for something does.

When I mentioned this on my Twitter account (follow me, rcaster – we are not afraid of shameless self promotion here) I was accosted by some #P2 fellow, which means he is a “Progressive” in Twitter lexicon. He claimed my idea was unfair because “the unemployed are not criminals!” I would have re-posted the conversation for you, but BlackJedi”somethingorother” was embarrassed enough to just erase his entire end of the conversation, and my tweets went as well (I guess that means I was blocked).

Imagine that, doing something for your community is an activity that should be relegated to those people who are being punished. Perhaps this is the truth about the soul of our communities, and why liberal areas tend to lack it. Doing community service is a punishment? Well I would rather bestow benefits upon people willing to contribute to their community, than give it to those who do not. And besides, who can take away the fact that people will feel better once they get into a productive groove; perhaps they will put their rear-into-gear afterward and go look for that next job with some new skills; perhaps they won’t sit around and feel sorry for themselves, but feel a sense of accomplishment for having achieved something, and that may just be the push they need to go out the door and apply. I used to get into arguments with my high school history teacher, Mr. Lubenetski, about FDR’s New Deal and whether or not it ended the Great Depression. He would say to me, looking exactly like Teddy Roosevelt (he did, red hair, mustache, glasses and all) and explode with his booming voice, “it may not have brought people all the way up to their feet, but it kept them off their knees!” If we are going to pay people who lost work, I say we put them back to work, because you may not be able to measure the benefit of doing so, but a man’s pride can carry him further than his pouting ever will.

-rj

Will Greece Hysteria Spread To US?

Greece Is Not Too Big To Fail

More of The Same

Politico reports that, In a few hours, President Obama will speak on the economic effects of last year’s stimulus package.  We can expect to hear how the stimulus is responsible for creating jobs, restoring confidence in the stock market, and saving the economy from catastrophic ruin.  PAY NO ATTENTION TO THAT MONOLITHIC INCREASE IN NATIONAL UNEMPLOYMENT FROM 8% TO 10%.  No, things are peachy keen here in the Republic.  In fact, what we really need is more government spending.  Paul Davidson, author of The Keynes Solution, reviewed in this morning’s Bloomberg seems to think so.  And faithful readers of the New York Times may be led to believe that the Keynesian touch is more than necessary after reading an article condoning the argument that stimulus spending may be “the most cost-effective way for the government to create jobs.”  Lest we forget, an article in today’s Wallstreet Journal reminds us that the “Bulk of Stimulus Spending [Is[ Yet To Come.”  It’s as if the current administration is out to scientifically prove Einstein’s theory that Insanity is “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Death and Taxes A La Greek

In an attempt to have their Baklava, and eat it too, Reuters reports that Greece will be implementing a new tax policy that, while conservative on its face, actually increases taxes for all citizens making over €30,000, the equivalent of approximately $41,000.  Now, while critiques of the critiques may point to the Finance Minister’s claim that “about 95 percent of individual tax filings report incomes below 30,000 euros …”, as evidence that a tax increase couldn’t hurt all that much, the truth of the matter is that a tax increase on the few who actually fund the economy and treasury can only mean bad news for the future.  Increased taxes on the productive chase away the productive.  As taxes rise, business owners will be forced to either cut corners or close shop.  Investors will look elsewhere, and the Greek economy will keel over and die.  What would Aristotle say?

Government Responsibilities: Defense, Roads, Treaties…Calories?

It had to happen- Congress wants to force certain restaurants to put caloric intake on their menus. Of course, it’s not just any restaurants- just the evil fast food restaurants. The ones putting a gun to America’s head and making us get fat.

Were our legislators not Democrats intent on taking over every aspect of our lives, this would be a joke. Unfortunately, that is what is required in the two health care reform bills on Capitol Hill. There are also two separate bills requiring the same thing. The goal, you see, is to help Americans lose weight and to overall become healthier. Of course, rather than go after fat Americans, the government is going after yet another business providing a wanted service.

I have a question for the legislators supporting this bill?(actually, a whole bunch, but I’ll limit it to one): do you really think Americans don’t know fast food isn’t healthy? The article linked above does a good job of telling both sides, and one of the critiques of the bill is that price will dictate intake of fast food far more than what’s in it for many people. Perhaps you could concentrate on getting out of the way of the economy so that it can recover and people will have more money to buy healthier food.

Can I Have Paul Krugman’s Nobel Prize?

Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman was on George Stephanopoulos’ show this past week doing a round table.? He made a lot of points about how politicos are blowing the deficit out of proportion.? And made the comment that other countries and the U.S. had come out of situations like this in the past.

For instance:

Now, the market has been wrong. But, then if you do the arithmetic, these numbers look huge. The American economy is huge. The debt burden, even after five years, is going to be well below as a share of GDP well below levels that lots of industrial countries have reached in the past, including ourselves after World War II, when we were able to handle that just fine.

The problem with this comparison is that after World War II the United States was one of the last industrialized, first-world nations that had not had its infrastructure bombed to hell.? We were one of the only major manufacturing countries left standing on the face of the planet.? Exports were massive, and our economy boomed.? That won’t happen this go around in a global economy all fighting for a piece of the pie after the world wide recession.

So I feel like it is only appropriate that Krugman share his Nobel Prize with me since he had not recognized this point.

I would like to thank the committee…

-nick

FORD IS… JOHN GALT?

There was a glimmer of real Hope yesterday for those of us that are more inclined to study the stocks and markets and profit margins: you know, libertarians. ?This was not the sort of “Hope” that can only be dispensed by your local politician and his/her district office, or the kind of “Hope” that represents the mere spinning?of facts to fit the administration’s particular world view that day to advance their agenda. ?

FORD… F-ed On Race Day, Found On Road Dead, Fix Or Repair Daily, F-er Only Runs Downhill…

Well, Ford Motor Company was the one American car company to politely decline salvation from the Messianic Administration and chose to atone for their own sins instead of being saved by the grace of… government. ?Ford Motor (F) posted a nearly $1billion profit for the third quarter. ?Ford Motors is doing things the American way, the rugged individualist way, the way that fathers teach their sons is the best way to get things done: Do It Yourself! ?Sometimes people need help, I am aware; but most of us have seen those good old mafia movies and shows, and getting help from the Obama administration seems to have similar consequences.

It is safe to say, I am a bit biased… my first car was a ’68 Ford Bronco, my last truck a 2004 Ford Ranger (I had a ’91 Volvo, which is now?owned by Ford if that counts for something). ?And my understanding has always been that Chevy was Latin for… feces.

?

-rj

Looks Like Everything’s Gonna Be OK!

Our modern society depends heavily on substantiating claims and backing them up with “facts”.? We see these here everyday, as writers for thelobbyist attempt to demonstrate that we do not just come up with the stuff we write out of thin air.? We are not the New York Times, so we are not afforded that privilege.? John Adams once sarcastically quipped that facts were “stubborn things,” and their stubbornness lies in the inherent inability of anyone to disprove what can be taken as a fact.? Such is the problem of the fact-value distinction: a derivative of the modern project that is exaggerated by political scientists and economist.? Take the numbers as they are, and let their quantitative values speak more loudly than their qualitative values.? What is better?? The fact that a policy raises more money, or the fact that a policy that raises more money also can contribute to cultural decay such as gambling.? There is no more right/wrong anymore, because that is all relative (to both liberals and many conservatives).? Instead, the answer will always be the one supported by quantitative facts.

So how then, are we to digest the recent GDP numbers that were released yesterday?? The news undoubtedly brought optimism to the number crunchers and economists who are no friend to the good life but rather the abundant life.? The DOW yesterday, ascended as though carried into the heavens on the wings of their optimism 199 points after a several-day long slump.? I am reminded of the line from the movie Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs, particularly the commercial (the line was sadly stricken from the movie which, I did indeed, pay to see and enjoyed) when the police officer says to the people with eyes the size of saucers, “Looks like everything turned out?O.K.!” as a flying piece of food destroys the building right behind him.

The recession is over… right?? A recession is defined as two or more quarters of economic contraction generally, or a 1.5% rise in unemployment, or any other number of things.? By all technicality, the worst recession in 7 quarters is over.? Those are the facts.?

This announcement was followed shortly by another economic declaration regarding the slumping consumer spending figures.? Economists admit that the strong GDP can be attributed to the government spending programs like “Cash for Clunkers” which turned out to have cost $24,000 per car.? In the end, however, it is being admitted that we can go ahead and plan for weaker than normal 4th Quarter profits.? Nevertheless, the fourth quarter is the one that leads into the holiday season, which will allow the administration and wall street syccophants to use that all so clever “we still had growth, it just wasn’t as much as we hoped,” or “we planned for it being bad, and it wasn’t as bad as our worst predictions.”?

Which of these facts shall we use to mold our own ideas of what the future will bring?? Is the recession over, and on the verge of full recovery?? Is the only thing holding us back from such a recovery is the opposition to the President’s federal expansion?? Why are there so many different figures pointing so many different ways?? Do they not understand that in our modern society we would rather be guided by mundane facts and figures instead of by reasoning toward the good life, and that we cannot do that so easily and escape the “pain of thinking” and the “agony of living” as Tocqueville warns??

The government programs that will be credited with bringing us out of an officialrecession do not touch or explain away human nature and the deeper problems our regime is facing.? We must dig to penetrating depths into the soul of our Republic, and learn to start thinking about what is right and wrong, and stop this slide into not thinking at all but reacting to the latest facts, figures and reports.?

-rj

The Daily Blow with Jon Stewart

Like a drug dealer, Mr. John Stewart supplies many with the political equivalent of crack. His show, The Daily Show, is an obvious parody of the political punditry saturating much of Cable news? airwaves; however, there seems to be a blurring line between humor and actuality. The events of the day could be considered humorous, because let?s face it, you have to have a sense of humor to be able to survive in the world of current events, politics, economics, and technology policy (whatever happened to my dear friend Nick?s has long gone unanswered). The growing influence that some of these shows have over the thoughts and beliefs of the ?younger? demographic is understandable, and frightening.

At the small university I attended, a Facebook group was created under the name ?I Get My News From the Daily Show.? Tongue-in-cheek groups like this on Facebook are a dime a dozen; for instance, a group sprung up in a matter of hours after Wife Swap featured an English gentleman who treated his new ?wife? from the Midwest as a trailer-trash Neanderthal. But there is truth in the comment that many people do not bother learning about their world or current events anymore, but they watch this show with equal regularity and quote it in class during their professor?s ?current events? time.

What interests me even more so, is when I watch Jon Stewart utilize a particular defense of his practices. He is the first to offer self-deprecating humor regarding his show and its influence. When engaging Tucker Carlson some years back on Crossfire, Jon makes the comment, ?you?re on CNN! The Show leading into me is puppets making prank phone calls!? The punch line was that the ?you?re on CNN? was supposed to demonstrate crossfire?s level of prestige. Nevertheless, Mr. Stewart is demonstrably quick to downplay the influence of his own show whenever someone calls out his overzealously progressive talking points; and his ability to become a ?hard-hitting questions? reporter when he is interviewing Jim Cramer, but when he interviews John Kerry in 2004 his questions amount to how Senator Kerry keeps fit.

Now we are to the meat of my displeasure with last Thursday?s interview with Jim Cramer. To his credit, Mr. Stewart did good homework and racked Jim Kramer over the coals. Mr. Cramer?s best defense: ?I?ll try to change.? Bravo Daily Show. Now, was I supposed to take that episode seriously or not? Jon Stewart persists that his show is not to be taken seriously, and these days he follows Reno 911 so that is slightly more intellectually stimulating than Prank Yankers (the puppets doing prank calls). I am now confused because Jon Stewart told me that his show is a crock of crap, but he just did an in-depth interview and dismantled the image of Jim Cramer as the all-knowing friend of the small time trader. During this interview, Jon Stewart makes the comment, ?I understand you want to make finance entertaining? but it?s not a [expletive] game.? This is what killed me. I could not help but dwell in futility as I would never be able to articulate the following sentiments to Mr. Stewart:

What do you call your existence Mr. Stewart? Politics has its moments, and these are definitely worth pointing out and having a good time with. But I am sick and tired of this hackneyed excuse of yours that you are not a legit show and nobody takes what you say seriously. You are misinforming thousands of people, you are taking advantage of their ignorance and apathy and molding it into the particular ideology that you most desire. How can you have the audacity (a popular word these days) to superciliously lecture people about serving the best interest as a whole, when you bastardize the very science that restricts or allows freedoms for individuals, property, religion or life itself? Politics, sir, is not a [expletive] game! It?s how people choose to govern their own, and their neighbor?s, lives! And with this in mind, you take quotes out of context, play them on your show, add a smart-ass line and make a funny face and we all laugh. Unfortunately, you very dangerously infiltrate your jokes and comedy with you political philosophy in a way that would make the most manipulative of entertainers proud.

Mr. Stewart needs to step down from his soap box, and look at himself and discover the true essence of his being. As a joke, himself.

-rj

Next Page »