The Right is Wrong and the Left is Wronger

An 8 step plan toward higher employment

An 8 step plan toward higher employment
By Tom Flake - Wednesday, August 31, 2011

I announced about a month ago on Brutally Honest that I was running for President on Votocracy and I could still use your support. But before deciding on whether to support me, I think you need to know how I would propose fixing the various problems that currently face America.

The next President's most pressing problem will be how to put millions of American's back to work and end chronic 8+ % unemployment. Many of you have read my posts before will recognize my "The Right is Wrong and Left is Wronger" bi-partisan approach.

Eight Step Plan

1) End H1B Visas - There is no reason to import citizens of other countries to perform jobs that American's will do if given the opportunity and training. American companies must work with universities to ensure that they are turning out graduates with usable skills, NOT simply throw up their hands and hire from abroad.

2) End Pell grant and Stafford subsidies for degrees that America doesn't need and which won't result in an education with long term employability outlook. Google the term STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) America needs more graduates with this type of training and currently has openings. Don't believe me? Go to Monster or Hotjobs and search on Engineering. There isn't a lack of jobs or opportunities in America, there is a mismatch between what we are training American's for and what the marketplace needs. Why isn't Pell and Stafford selective in what we are funding with taxpayer monies?

3) Create a windfall profit tax on the largest 1000 companies that are profitable, but don't increase employment by 10% between Jan 1, 2012 and Dec 31, 2012. The tax shall be equivalent to 100% of profit earned during that calendar year. Some reading this will say, that it isn't up to the company's to create jobs. Normally I would agree and suggest that the role of companies is to maximize profits for the benefit of their shareholders. However, this unemployment has reached crisis proportions for two reasons 1) In order to balance the budget, we need to not only cut spending, we need to increase revenue. In order to increase revenue we can either raise taxes or grow the tax base. In order to grow the tax base we need to employ more people. 2) People who are unemployed for long periods see their sellable skills atrophy and therefore they become less and less likely to EVER be employed. It is predictable that the jobs created will be low paying (except for those hired to replace the H1B visa jobs that are discontinued) However, this moves people off of the unemployment roles and gives them the opportunity to re-build atrophied jobs skills. This needs to be a war on unemployment and the drastic actions necessary during war need to be employed. Half measure won't work.

4) Mandate that all government regulatory bodies freeze new regulation and reduce existing regulation by 25% before writing any new rules. They have 90 days to comply.

5) Reduce the civil service workforce by 10% during 2012 and reduce the pay of those remaining on civil service pay by 10%. This may seem counter intuitive at first, but this again goes to the heart of getting government off of the back of small and medium sized business. By reducing government spending, you reduce the crowding out affect and make capital available to business.

6) In recent years, massive flooding has caused billions in damage and lost productivity. I propose a massive government spending program (paid for by number 5 above) and by a surcharge on Insurance companies profits. This program, similar to the construction of the Eisenhower highway system, would pay for the construction of massive pipelines between the Mississippi River, it's tributaries and the west. Texas and Oklahoma have faced drought and its associated cost, massive reservoirs in Nevada are at record lows while at the same time we have experienced record flooding on the Red and other rivers . If there were reservoirs in place and transfer capability in place we could move the water during floods and have it available during droughts. This would be a massive undertaking would cost Billions but would save lives, replenish aquifers and reservoirs, create jobs and ultimately save insurance companies billions.

7) A sane national energy policy. Over five years, phase out the import of oil or petroleum products from outside the Western hemisphere. At five years make it illegal to import oil or petroleum products from outside the western hemisphere and to export oil or gas from the U.S. or its territories. Mandate duel fuel cars that run on both liquid natural gas and traditional gasoline. Mandate an increase in domestic drilling. Subsidize the construction of a national pipeline infrastructure with two goals: a)Move LNG to market b) move petroleum from the Green River Formation and Tar Sands in Canada to market. The massive changes in infrastructure (construction of pipelines, and construction of LNG distribution infrastructure) will result in significant job creation

8) Rather than paying people on unemployment to sit around and simply be unemployed. Require that all citizens receiving unemployment compensation be enrolled in a job training program and only provide training for jobs where there is a demonstrated need for employees in a particular field. Fund the training program in addition to unemployment and provide the training at no cost to the trainee (unemployed). Technology and the marketplace are moving so quickly that job skills mismatch and obsolescence are a real threat to America's competitiveness and expectations about jobs skills training and the way we fund them have not kept up.

This isn't an all inclusive list, but my analysis suggests that this combination of approaches would create almost 3 million net of civil servant layoffs new jobs in 2012. Compare and contrast that with President Obama's job creation plan when it is announced in the next week or so. If you like my plan better, support my candidacy on Votocracy.

"We regretfully report the death of your country"

"We regretfully report the death of your country"
By Tom Flake - Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Mr. and Mrs. American,

We regretfully report the death of your country. It happened on 8/2/2011. The cause of death was economic murder. It was perpetrated by a gang in Washington called the "elite". Witnesses were plentiful but it appears that no one really wanted to get involved.

I am sad today. Sad because the conservatives that were elected in November were rolled. Sad because we've lost our last best hope. 2012 will not be a landslide victory for conservatives. The furor that was building will now ebb as people willing to devote their land, their fortune, their sacred honor to the cause of putting America back on track will feel betrayed, that nothing they can do (like providing the Republican party the greatest political victory in almost 100 years) has any impact.

If things had gone as envisioned right after November, we should be celebrating, there is no reason the Republicans had to do anything. If they had just said, "no" the debt ceiling would have remained in place and today the President and Treasury Secretary Geithner would be forced to make the cuts that the country needs. Instead they rolled our representatives and we've taken a different path.

What does the different path look like? As the country borrows more, essentially increasing the supply of dollars (printing more money) the value of the dollar will decrease. The outcome will not be all bad, US exports will increase and jobs due to exports will increase. Some jobs that have been pushed overseas will come back home, so for the working class there will be some benefit, some of them will have jobs. But for the young opportunity will not be as common. For the old on fixed income EVERYTHING will be more expensive. In fact, everything will be more expensive for everyone, but those on fixed income will notice it more. Think $5 gas within two years. Think $3500 per ounce gold within two years.

The big lie told to seniors, the block that politicians really listen to, was this...We aren't going to cut your Medicare or your Social Security. The shell game, the reality, is this instead what the bankers and politicians have done is agreed to provide those benefits with less valuable dollars. So the unsophisticated citizens think they have maintained their benefits but the reality is they will feel MUCH poorer and not know why.

So we've mortgaged our countries future, scammed the elderly into believing we've protected their interests and will convince the middle class that new jobs are being created, (all the while not noticing that those jobs don't pay sufficient to provide the same standard of living) but pay no attention to the man behind the curtain he's the charlatan who stole your country.

I feel like the ghost of Christmases yet to come.

I post this in the hope that you will contact you congressman and senators and ask them to NOT support either the Boehner bill or the Reid bill. In fact, to support NOT raising the debt ceiling and to work with President Obama to make cuts in the best way possible to spare as many as possible as much pain as possible. The reality is that even under those circumstances, I fear that President Obama will make the cuts as painful as possible in order to score political points.

Never the less it is the right thing to do. Under a circumstance where the government is no longer borrowing, they have to balance the budget. In such a case, the dollar will not be devalued, (in fact the opposite will occur) seniors buying power on fixed income will be preserved. The dollars that would otherwise have been lent to the government will flow to the private sector as "crowding out" is reduced and opportunity for the young will be preserved. Our ability to export will be less than it would have been under a devalued dollar scenario, but our ability to create domestic products will be enhanced AND prices will fall, so that those dollars we do have will buy more.

"There is a workable plan for fixing much of what ails the economy"

"There is a workable plan for fixing much of what ails the economy"
By Tom Flake - Wednesday, July 06, 2011

Long time readers will note that my positions are not normally taken without research taken from primary documents and the same applies to the current budget debate.

The Ryan plan, which serves as the launching point for Republican negotiations, takes the position that Medicare, Social Security and Defense are the Federal Government's largest expenses and are those areas most in need of cutting if the current budget is to be brought closer to balance.

Under the premise that the "Right is Wrong", I would submit that Social Security and its attendant costs should be left alone. "Why?", you might ask? Because the Social Security system and its attendant taxes currently run a surplus when including the interest it earns on the Social Security Trust Fund. You can find the details here. I could go on at length about how 7% Social Security Tax plus 7% employer match if invested by the employee in the market would be much better for the employee. I could go on at length about how Social Security is essentially indentured servitude by those living shorter lives (black men) for the benefit of those living longer lives (white women). This article is primarily interested in what is currently on the table, not what should be on the table in an ideal world.

File what follows under "the Left is Wronger" moniker.

If you exclude Social Security from what's on the table, that leaves Medicare and Defense for cuts and tax increases and elimination of deductions for revenue increases. Since the Democrats have never met a government program they didn't like, significant cuts to Medicare are unlikely to get their support, yet this is a program that is only 76% funded by the taxes collected for the program. The rest must come from general taxes collected. The math here is easy. Cut the program expenditures by the amount of the shortfall. My recommendation is to start with the unfunded drug benefit. Using the taxing power of the government to pay for drugs which people do not earn enough to pay for on their own is NOT the proper role of government. When the government is borrowing money from our enemies and competitors using their (non-voting) children's credit cards to buy their grandparents medication, it should be categorized as criminal negligence or treason.

Cutting Medicare to a size congruent with taxes collected for Medicare would not balance the budget, but it frames the argument correctly. Since Social Security pays for itself, and Medicare if cut to the size congruent with taxes collected for that purpose would essentially pay for itself, then the rest of the cuts would need to fall squarely on the Department of Defense and other discretionary programs. These cuts need to be 10% of the federal budget every year for the next three years, with a re-evaluation at that time. This would be a $340 billion (roughly) cut this year, a $300 billion (roughly) next year and a $280 (roughly) cut the following year.

This $920 billion in cuts over three years, would do two things. If would reduce the deficit to something more manageable (about $500 billion) and by doing so would reduce the "crowding out" effect that government borrowing has on the private sector. That is, if the Federal Government stops borrowing so much, then creditors have to put that money to work in other areas. (the private sector) This is really the area where the Left is totally devoid of ideas, how to grow the private sector. They either realize this but have a different agenda or they are ignorant of the fact that government borrowing negatively impact funds available for private borrowing.

So let's sum up. Leave Social Security alone, cut Medicare to the size consistent with the taxes collected for that purpose and cut the rest of the Federal Bureaucracy 10% a year over 3 years. Stimulate job creation by reducing Federal borrowing and there is a workable plan for fixing much of what ails the economy.

What They are Doing to you -or- Why I Wouldn't Hire These Guys to Negotiate for a Ham Sandwich

What they are doing to you (-or-) Why I wouldn't hire these guys to negotiate for a ham sandwichBy Tom Flake June 3, 2011Yesterday House Speaker John Boehner spoke about the Republican position on raising the debt ceiling. The position was essentially that any increase in borrowing authority needed to be tied to an equal decrease in spending. Sounds good on the surface. The Democratic position is essentially that the increase in borrowing authority needs to be decoupled from any negotiations with regard to cuts in spending.Here's the thing. Both parties seem to be working around an increase of $2.4 trillion in borrowing authority. When fully exercised (notice I didn't say if) the national debt will be $16.7 trillion. So let's say that both parties "compromise" and that the debt ceiling is raised and spending cuts of $2.4 trillion are agreed to. What they aren't telling you is that these cuts will be to a baseline budget over ten years. This means that in reality the cuts are going to be more like $240 billion per year. Who really talks about cuts in their aggregate amount over ten years anyway? Is that how you and your spouse discuss the household budget? "Gee dear I know we are still spending more than we make, but just think how much we'll save over ten years?"The current deficit is $2.6 trillion per year. Cutting the budget by the amount that the Boehner is floating will reduce the deficit to $2.4 trillion... does that sound to you anything like what you thought you were sending the new guys to Washington to do? Reduce the deficit by 1/13? I am still trying to run the numbers but even this number doesn't sound anything like the Ryan plan. So essentially the Republicans have already caved on the Ryan plan (which was wholly inadequate) AND they are working in the wrong direction. BTW how much have the Democrats moved from their position?As far as I can tell the Democrats have ceded no territory. "We need to increase spending and no cuts to anything is the only acceptable alternative". I like their tenacity and wishour guys had half the same testicular fortitude. You might consider calling and writing your Congressman and Senators. I suggest using the phrase, "Have I mentioned your job is on the line here."

How Many Illegal Aliens are Within Five Miles of the Real West Point?

"How many illegal aliens are within five miles of the REAL West Point?"By Tom Flake May 9,2011In a previous post I mentioned that it struck me that the Obama administration was managing public perception in a way that reminded me of a Shakespearean play, "Full of sound and fury signifying nothing" (Macbeth) . It strikes me today that it reminds me of another Shakespearean play, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" (Hamlet).For almost two weeks now, we have been told how Pakistani intelligence failed, how Bin Laden had a compound only miles from the Pakistani "West Point" (as it were) and how that represents at best incompetence on the part of Pakistani military/intelligence and at worst collusion with Al Qaeda.Alright. Maybe that is so, maybe the Pakistani's are incompetent because they allowed one illegal immigrant to reside unmolested within their borders for five years. There is no percentage in it for me to defend Pakistan. But if the administration wants any moral authority don't they need to confess how inadequate their efforts have been at controlling 20 million illegal immigrants within our borders? If I were anyone in the Pakistani political or military establishment, it is at this point that I would hammer the Obama administration, everywhere I could on the world stage. This screams the parable Jesus taught about the mote in your brother's eye vs the beam in your own eye. So if the Pakistanis start screaming about, "we'll keep out the single person when you can keep out the 20 million people", what will we say then?Some might say that, "It isn't the same, Osama was a wanted criminal". If I were the Pakistanis I'd respond, "You are right, he was a single person and as difficult to find as a needle in a haystack. Whereas with 20 million illegal immigrants, all you have to do is point in any direction." BTW simply being here makes them criminals (illegal aliens). If that isn't enough to reduce the list of illegals in this country to just those that are criminals because they work in human trafficking or the drug trade, do you think they outnumber the single person that was Bin Laden? One final question, before you put too much stock in the administration protestations, at this moment, right now, how many illegal aliens are within five miles of the REAL West Point? Do you think it is more than one? The President doth protest too much, methinks.If I were the Pakistanis I'd offer to help out with the illegal aliens near West Point, it has too much symmetry not to.

I am Running for President

"I am running for president..."By Tom Flake
There is currently an experiment in Social Media going on at www.votocracy.com . It is a mock election with real world implications. I'd like to ask for your support.I am running for president and unlike virtually all of the other candidates, you know exactly where I stand on a host of issues. You may not agree with everything I've written, but I've laid it out there. I hope you'll agree that is the type of "lay it on the line in an honest fashion" leadership the country needs right now. Also, unlike our current administration or many of the challengers, I have a definite plan. Since this is a blog, and many of you have blogs of your own. I ask that you support my candidacy by going to www.votocracy.com and voting for me AND ask your friends to do the same thing. If they want to know where I stand, send them to leftiswronger.com. They can get more information in half an hour on my positions than they've gotten in four years (candidacy + presidency) on President Obama's positions and I'm not making money from selling you a book.Thanks,Tom

Think About This as You See Stories About Occupy Wall Street

The New Name for HoovervilleBy Tom FlakeOccupy Wall Street is now entering its third week and showing no signs of weakening. In fact, as the unions attempt to co-opt the movement for their own ends, it may in fact strengthen and become a long term facet of American life. Have you asked yourself where those people are living? Where they are going at night?From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Hooverville near Portland, OregonA Hooverville was the popular name for shanty towns built by homeless people during the Great Depression. They were named after the President of the United States at the time, Herbert Hoover, because he allegedly let the nation slide into depression. The term was coined by Charles Michelson, publicity chief of the Democratic National Committee.[1] The name Hooverville has also been used to describe the tent cities commonly found in modern-day America.Homelessness was present before the Great Depression, and hobos and tramps were common sights in the 1920s, but the economic downturn increased their numbers and concentrated them in urban settlements close to soup kitchens run by charities. These settlements were often formed on empty land and generally consisted of tents and small shacks. Authorities did not officially recognize these Hoovervilles and occasionally removed the occupants for trespassing on private lands, but they were frequently tolerated or ignored out of necessity. The New Deal enacted special relief programs aimed at the homeless under the Federal Transient Service (FTS), which operated from 1933-35.Some of the men who were forced to live in these conditions possessed construction skills and were able to build their houses out of stone. Most people, however, resorted to building their residences out of wood from crates, cardboard, scraps of metal, or whatever materials were available to them. They usually had a small stove, bedding and a couple of simple cooking implements.Most of these unemployed residents of the Hoovervilles used public charities or begged for food from those who had housing during this era. Democrats coined other terms, such as "Hoover blanket" (old newspaper used as blanketing) and "Hoover flag" (an empty pocket turned inside out). "Hoover leather" was cardboard used to line a shoe with the sole worn through. A "Hoover wagon" was an automobile with horses hitched to it because the owner could not afford fuel; in Canada, these were known as Bennett buggies, after the Prime Minister at the time.After 1940 the economy recovered, unemployment fell, and shanty eradication programs destroyed all the Hoovervilles.[2]Many are living at the site, Wall Street or some other large city near you. So there is a historical analog for this protest and these temporary cities within cities. At this point the Democrats, seem to be giving them a wink and a nod, but I am going to make a prediction. Currently the optics are that this is a protest against Wall Street. But the ire of the participants will eventually become focused on the administration. When that happens, when these tent cities begin to be known as Obamatowns, the optics will shift and the current administration’s tolerance will be at an end. I predict that if this becomes a primary issue and the GOP candidates begin to successfully tie Obamatowns to the administration, well, bad things will happen, as this administration has shown no tolerance for anyone that makes them look bad…other than themselves of course.

Now Back to Reality

Thursday, May 05, 2011

"Now Back to Reality"

By Tom Flake

Osama Bin Ladin is dead. I am relieved. Someone who wanted to kill me and my way of life has assumed room temperature and we should at least take time to breath one sigh of relief...okay now back to reality.

The Obama administration had information on OSL's location for about nine months, perhaps longer. The timing of this raid, at this time, was exquisite from a political point of view. Criticism of BHO regarding the national debt, the larger questions regarding his handling of the overall economy (Who really owns GM, AIG and Chrysler anyway?) his failure to be transparent with his personal records, all this and more was reaching a crescendo and weirdly enough it was looking as if Donald Trump might have a real shot at the GOP nomination. With one action BHO was able to (for now) eliminate discussion of the debt, silence the criticism and put all of the potential GOP nominees off their game. So while the military operation was a significant victory in that one major leader of the opposition has been removed from the board. The political operation was a sweeping victory...Where does one buy a flag at 11:30 at night on a Sunday in New York anyway? Had you thought about that?

Here is the issue, we are still days away from reaching our national credit card limit. After that it will be a matter of weeks until we default on our obligations. The Congress and President need to cut spending and no plan that has been floated that is even in the right zip code. Notice each time they float an idea, they state how much it will save over ten years. It sounds so much more impressive that way, don't you think? The most recent "plan" floated by the Senate is to cut $4 trillion over ten years. Sounds amazing, that'll fix things right?

Perspective..we are currently $14.25 trillion (rounding) in debt. The deficit is about $1.6 trillion per year. So over ten years, (using simple math) the debt will be $1.6 trillion x 10 years = $16 trillion + $14.25 trillion = $30.25 trillion. But wait, that's okay the Senate wants to cut $4 trillion over ten years! We're saved! Wait, $30.25 trillion - $4 trillion= $26.25 trillion....It's nothing but a shell game and both teams (Rs&Ds) are playing against you and me. Paul Ryan's plan works this way $1 trillion (deficit per year) x 10 years = $10 trillion +$14.25 trillion = $24.25 trillion debt in 2021. Admittedly Ryan's plan is better than the Senate plan, but that is akin to saying that I had to have my leg amputated below the knee rather than above the knee. It still sucks, only to a marginally less degree.

So breathe a sigh of relief that OBL is dead. Celebrate if you must. But don't take your eye off the ball. The real criminals and those causing real pain are our elected officials who don't take the Federal debt and deficit seriously.

If you haven't read George Orwell's 1984 or haven't read it recently, I recommend that you do. You may, like I, be disturbed at how prescient it is. In many ways Osama Bin Ladin has been the Emmanuel Goldstein (1984, page 10) for the generation currently coming of age. A boogey man used by the government to keep the masses in line. While OBL was directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of thousands. Our Federal debt and those responsible for it, will be culpable for the slavery of millions.

Keep your eye on the ball.

This Fight for America's Soul Must Occur Now

Wednesday, April 13, 2011 This Fight for America's Soul Must Occur Now By Tom Flake If we are going to do anything about the crushing debt we are leaving our children and grandchildren, why are we accepting Boehner's boner? The $38 Billion cut is about two days spending. Ryan’s proposal would cut $5 Trillion over ten years. (an average of $500 Billion per year) The President’s speech scheduled for tonight, has been reported to contain $4 Trillion in cuts over ten years. (an average of $400 Billion per year) All of these efforts fall short and are paltry in comparison to what we as a country need to do before we become Greece or Ireland. We need to get to a balanced budget, this means cutting 40% of the Federal Budget. The $38 Billion came almost exclusively from "discretionary" spending in the recent congressional deal. We need to cut $400 Billion this year, and $400 Billion next year and $400 Billion the year after and so on for five years. Because the cut in the first year repeats year after year and is added to by the cut in the second year, and so on, this represents a cut of $22 Trillion over ten years. This really puts in perspective how insignificant and inadequate the cuts put forward by both the Republican’s and the Democrat’s really are. But this is what is really required to get to a balanced budget and begins to allow for us to pay down our debt. To be sure some of those cuts need to come from discretionary spending, but they primarily need to come from Medicare, Medicaid and Department of Defense spending. Nobody's plan (that I’ve heard proposed) comes close to this, but this is what is required. Why is this feasible? The private sector economy is creating about 200,000 jobs per month right now. The cuts to the Federal budget that I would propose will necessitate laying some civil servants and some contract employees off. If the number of employees required to be laid off reached 1MM, the private sector economy would absorb those people in about 5 months time. From a smaller government is better government perspective, it would be a net gain to the economy from a tax base perspective. The Federal government would stop competing with private industry for the $22 Trillion which would flow into private sector investments over the ten years. That money would naturally flow to small business loans, home loans etc. It would make everything in the private sector much easier, which in turn would create more jobs, which would grow the tax base, which might allow more government spending in the future. Why now? The political will is there now. If the Republican's fail to seize it now, not only will we be another $1.7 Trillion in debt, the political tide that swept the Tea Party Republican's to power will ebb. The incumbent Republicans and Democrats vowed to co-opt the Tea Party Republicans we sent to Washington in November. Remember that? I believe they will be able to after some period of time. So this fight for America’s soul must occur now, while the idealist in among the Tea Party swing a big bat and before they are co-opted. Currently our government is insane. We borrow money from China to give arms and armament to Israel so that they can attack/defend against Lebanon/Hezbollah. Once the attack is over we offer assistance to Lebanon/Hezbollah. Also with money borrowed from China. Why don’t we simply, NOT give money to Israel and NOT give money to Lebanon? The insanity doesn’t end there. We recently pledged $2 Billion in assistance to Petrobras, the largest oil company in Brazil, to develop oil wells in the gulf of Mexico. Keep in mind, we don’t have $2 BB, what that means is that we borrowed $2 Billion from the Chinese to give to Petrobras. (Welfare for American oil companies out, welfare for foreign oil companies developing wells in our territorial waters, in) But it gets better. Petrobras has a contract with China to sell it ALL of the oil it produces! Let me translate in case you missed that. America borrowed money from China to give to Petrobras to develop oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico to so that the oil can be sold to China! The insanity reaches down into the typical and mundane. Currently civil servants pay taxes from their pay which came from the government, back to the government, so that other civil servants can count and audit the amounts paid. Seems like there must be some overhead in there somewhere. Why not reduce Civil Servant pay by 20% and them exempt them from Federal income tax. Reduce the IRS workforce by the percentage that civil servant represent in the economy and save money coming and going? Politicians would position solving these problems as hard. It isn’t hard, spending this much money took George Bush and Barak Obama three years. It shouldn’t take much more than three years to get us to balance. Along the way we will have to have meaningful discussions about the rightful role of government. We will have to laud entrepreneurs and private enterprise. We will have (some extent) shame civil servants. We should never again have a President say that our best and brightest should go into public service. I want our best and brightest to go into private industry. I want them to make a boatload of money and I want them to create thousands of jobs. In order to realize this vision, we have to change the debate. Cuts must be ramped up several times, some taxes may need to be increased and the private sector should be espoused not the public sector.

A Tale Told by an Idiot, Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing

Tuesday, April 12, 2011"A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"By Tom FlakeHere we are two years into President Barak Obama's administration and I have to admit as I searched for an analogy, or metaphor to compare/contrast his administration, I was reminded of nothing so much as a Shakespearian play. Those on the right might say, "That's too high praise". But bear with me. The Shakespearian play to which I refer is MacBeth and in particular the line... "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Let me illustrate.On 12.3.2009 Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said that "revving up the economy and get companies to start creating jobs again was Job No.1" The article can be found here. During the ensuing 2 years the federal government was the primary creator of jobs and those jobs, due to the project centric nature of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act were transitory in nature. In other words the job only existed during the duration of the project. Now that most of those projects are winding down, it should be expected that those jobs will be eliminated. Once that occurs, unemployment will revert to an essentially unchanged level at the mid 9% range or higher.On 3.10.11 Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said that President Obama's administration was "focused like a laser beam" on gas prices. The article can be found here. The article goes on to say that in Thursday of that week gas was at $3.59. In February it had been $3.17 and in March of 2010 the price had been $2.76. As I write this 4/12 the price is $4.00. Three months before the last election, then Senator Obama called for release of fuel from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which had recently reached $4.11. The source can be found here. So I don't get it, if he is focused like a laser beam, he makes several speeches over a two week period that have no effect, he doesn't take the action that he advocated a previous President take and then he moves on with no effect to show for the effort.To some extent President Obama is our creation. We as a people, and here I am stereotyping, have attention spans comparable to gerbils. Our ADD President was hired by us primarily because of his ability to entertain us not because of his track record of doing anything. Did we really expect that a Senator whose major accomplishment during his tenure in Illinois was to vote "present" was going to suddenly learn to roll up his sleeves and stick with problems until they are resolved? If past behavior is indicative of future behavior, what behavior and results should we expect from this President? I think today's announcement by Michelle Obama is a good case in point. The template seems to be that a close advisor (Treasury Secretary, Transportation Secretary, First Lady) makes an announcement that some issue pressing to the populace has risen to the President's attention (Unemployment, Oil Prices, The state of military families). The President then makes a speech or speeches indicating that 1) He feels our pain 2) He will make it a high priority (Job No.1, Focus like a laser etc.). The "focus" and by this I mean speeches, last for about two weeks and then he moves on to NOT solve another problem.I've given you examples from the past, I gave you an example from the present, now let me predict the future. In the next few days some close advisor to the President will announce that it has come to the attention of the President that the Federal Debt, associated interest payments and tax burden are strapping middle-class and poor people. That the President will focus like a laser on this problem. For two weeks (until the Federal Debt Ceiling is raising by another Trillion dollars) we will hear speeches indicating his knowledge and caring on the problem, how he is "rolling up his sleeves" and "locking arms with Republicans" and other such crap and then our attention will wane and he will move on. Our children will be another Trillion in debt and we should blame nobody but ourselves, because it is a "Tale told to idiots full of sound and fury signifying nothing."