No delusions should remain that the most recent presidential election has “transformed” Washington into anything grander than what it has always been: a ‘spoils exchange’ where A and B shamelessly conspire to rob C and then swap the plundered proceeds with D for D’s commitment to help A and B retain their seats on this exchange.
Cats do not, and will never, bark. They do, and always will, (rent-)seek out and devour weak prey.
Podcast RSS Feed
Full EconTalk Text
{ 46 comments }
The blinders of delusion began shredding away from my face in the 60s, and were totally gone by the time I retired from the military.
I still had a lot to learn to be sure, but I certainly was no longer deluded about what I was dealing with. The hows and why took some time to put together, and I am not sure I am yet there in my total understanding.
Here is a question for everyone and it relates back to a recent post in which the checks and balances of the three branches of government were brought up. That three legged stool needs each independent leg to be there and be steady in order for the stool to be an effective stool; but, the questions is does not the stool perform as effectively with three colluding legs as it does with three independent legs?
The checks and balances can only work if the three branches choose to be opposed to the dominance of any one branch but if they all choose to conspire against the people and share the spoils, then there are three branches but no checks and balances, right?
So, are we seeing checks and balances, or are we seeing agreement and coordination?
I’m trying to challenge myself to figure out how Obama defends this in his own mind. We all know the guy is smart, educated, and surrounded by plenty of the same. He also professes to be looking out for the good of the country. For the life of me, I simply cannot come up with any explanation for this kind of nonsense that is anything short of cronyism.
“We all know the guy is smart, educated, and surrounded by plenty of the same.”
Don we know that, David?
If that is true, why is he and his group making the same old mistakes that have been made before?
Total degeneration of entire nations and peoples have come from people pursuing what Obama, et. al, are pursuing, so do we know he is smart and has adequate education?
I doubt it.
Maybe they aren’t making mistakes. Maybe they understand the damage they are doing and just trying to take it over. We aren’t talking about people who like capitalism and are trying to save it. I suspect we are dealing with people who want to make cause more problems to give them excuses to take even more power.
That would help explain why such a large number of educated advisors could agree that the PotUS should say such absurd things. Their assumption of the imbecility of most Americans voters (and you would have to be an imbecile to accept some of what the PotUS says), appears to have been a miscalculation this time.
I can agree with what you’ve said but when it comes right down to it, you have to recognize that they already have taken it over.
They have the executive branch and both houses of congress, and the SCOTUS is just a sideshow as they can not command any force beyond moral outrage, and I doubt we’d even see that reported.
Sorry, David, disagree. Obama is not smart; he is half-educated. He knows about (supposed) inequality, meaningless terms like “social justice” and “community organizing,” and basically everything that is bad about our current system, but he knows virtually nothing about resource allocation, price discovery, tradeoffs, and wealth creation.
The fact that he 1) has never been exposed to the other portion of reality (i.e. the more important half) and 2) has never sought out that side, at least for cursory exposure, means that he is ignorant and obtuse.
You guys can bash Obama all you want, but you’re sighting on the wrong target. Obama isn’t the problem The government is the problem. It is an institution that exists to control – through violence (or its threat) – an entire population. Eliminate the government and people like Obama will be silly sideshows.
I think you both our right. Obama is a community organizer and he is now seeking “social justice”. But as long as we stray from the Constitutional Republic these are the types of people who will be attracted to government service. If the power is gone and the government only takes on a very limited scope such as police and Defense of the Nation and little hope of robbing from one group to give to another then in effect it doesn’t matter.
Amigo,
To make this happen you got some fixing to do.
“Eliminate the government and people like Obama will be silly sideshows.”
Yeah an many of us would be serfs, sharecroppers and indentured servants on the property owned by the elite wealthy class of privilege. Yeah and Obama will be a silly sideshow… you got that part right.
The government is us; we are the government, you and I.
Theodore Roosevelt
No??? What then?
muirduck,Guy goes into a bar, there’s a robot bartender. The robot says, “What will you have?” The guy says, “Martini.” The robot brings back the best martini ever and says to the man, “Whats your IQ?” The guy says, “168″. The robot then proceeds to talk about physics, space exploration and medical technology. The guy leaves, but he is curious, so he goes back into the bar. The robot bartender says,”What will you have?” The guy says, “Martini”. Again, the robot makes a great martini, gives it to the man and says, “Whats your IQ?” The guy says, “100.” The robot then starts to ta lk about Nascar, Budweiser and John Deere tractors.The guy leaves, but finds it very interesting, so he thinks he will try it one more time. He goes back into the bar. The robot says, “What will you have?” The guy says, “Martini”, and the robot brings him another great martini. The robot then says, “Whats your IQ?” The guy says, “Uh, about 50.” The robot leans in real close and says, “So, you people still happy you voted for Obama?” That about sums it up…
There is just so much truth in humor, isn’t their my pet?
Danphillips,
There is an analogy that I like to use to explain why Obama is a problem and the government is as well. It helps explain why the problem of Obama et. al. can be fixed more easily than the government.
I wake up one morning and go to let my dog out to pee. Before she gets out the door I see a large vicious pit bull (Obama) has managed to invade my fenced in yard. I keep my dog in the house and contemplate my problem. Obviously some dog owner (government) has been careless and allowed their pit bull to escape, hence the pit bull in my yard.
Now let me put the problems into order of priority.
The pit bull is the immediate problem as I can not get out of the house until I have managed to effectively deal with him. My garage is not part of my house, there is a breezeway, but the fence includes the entrance to the garage that is reachable from the house. I can not even leave my house to go to the garage to find the owners as the vicious pit bull will attack me in the breezeway. Plus, unless I subdue the pitbull to look at its collar, I have no chance of even knowing who to look for that is responsible for the pitbull. The pitbull (Obama) is the immediate problem. The owners (government) are the secondary problem.
Who the owners of the pit bull are and how to present, deal with, to them the results of their carelessness is a matter that must be dealt with after I deal with the immediate problem of the pit bull in my yard.
You see Danphillips, both Obama and the government are problems separate onto themselves and must be dealt with as immediate and secondary problems.
Now at any point in my analogy if you would like to add in behind the name Obama, the words democrats, feel free to do so, it will help you understand why Obama is the immediate problem.
BTW, if you haven’t seen any of my posts in the past, I certainly agree with you that government is a problem that must be fixed. We might have to talk about how to fix it though.
You make a good point, vidyohs, but as I said earlier I think you are aiming at the wrong target. People like Obama are a dime a dozen. There is a pipeline a mile long of Obama wannabes waiting their turn as the head of state. Removing Obama will do nothing to change the situation. Someone new will be plugged into the place where he now resides.
I’ll be happy to discuss remedies with you any time.
Obama, like most political types, is smart/clever, etc., however, as with most political types, lacking in wisdom.
That a public option will increase competition, could only be construed as smart or wise if the goal is to get people to accept what you know is false, and people actually do fall for it.
Challenge: Tell me something, anything, that BHO has said or written that is smart–above the level of an average college freshman poli sci major.
People are smart in different ways, as a comedian is smart about humor. Obama is smart about political dealing, of little use to the rest of us, to be sure.I couldn’t tell you anything about what BHO has said or written as I have paid him so little attention. The output of Obama, et al, is so boring that I can’t bear with it for ver;y long.I don’t expect much in the way of wisdom from politicians other than a skill in working their base support.
This from U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk. “Enforcing trade laws is key to maintaining an open and free trading system.”
Doublespeak.
That’s priceless. ‘Open and free’ trading system = micromanaged trade with a dash of protectionism. Even the words ‘trading system’ on their own send shivers down my back.
As has been mentioned by Don in the past: How many people will die on the highways driving on worn out tires trying to make them last a little longer due to the higher costs imposed by this tariff? How many lives is a union job worth?
The article says 5000 jobs have been lost due to Chinese tire imports. How many jobs will be lost due to the higher costs imposed on all businesses that operate motor vehicles in the US? How many millions of people will be made poorer as a result of this law to save a few thousand union jobs?
Fatally Defective Chinese Tires
A fatal auto accident in Pennsylvania has stirred concerns about another potentially hazardous Chinese product in wide use in the U.S.: tires. About 450,000 Chinese-made tires sold in the U.S. — and possibly many more — may lack an important safety feature, according to federal regulators and the U.S. distributor that helped design them. The tires are defective because an unknown portion of the tires either lack a safety feature designed to make them more durable or they lack enough of the safety feature. Read more about the Chinese defective tires and the fatal accident they have caused.
“Fatally Defective Chinese TiresA fatal auto accident in Pennsylvania has stirred concerns about another potentially hazardous Chinese product in wide use in the U.S.: tires. About 450,000 Chinese-made tires sold in the U.S. — and possibly many more — may lack an important safety feature, according to federal regulators and the U.S. distributor that helped design them.”http://www.torontodailynews.com/index.php/Busin…The Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Co. is responsible for the manufacturing of the tires. That means responsibility for the Quality Assurance of the product too. Where’s the WTO? Why isn’t this big bureaucracy protecting us? Because the WTO is a big, bloated, governmental body in and of itself.
“Fatally Defective Chinese Tires”
I knew that was coming.
Of course they only make defective tires in China.
From the Chicago Tribune, September 21, 2000:
“But the future of his plant may depend on how well Firestone recovers from this summer’s recall of 6.5 million defective tires, most of them manufactured in Decatur.”
There is no tire more dangerous than one which is worn out. Inexpensive tires make it much more likely that worn out tires will be replaced sooner rather than later. Obama’s action is a direct assault on the working poor that he claims to champion. How many must die for Obama to maintain favor with his union “field mobilizers?”
“The AFL-CIO spent $53 million and its trade union affiliates $250 million to help Barack Obama win the White House, relying mostly on “field mobilization” campaigns to turn out a favorable vote.” http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0129/p16s01-wmgn.html
If they’re so fatal, why not just ban them? Why slap a tariff on them that will only reduce the pace at which they came into the U.S.?
Look – I’m all for consumer protection legislation. If they’re that dangerous ban the damn things and be done with it. It’s a completely different issue from protectionism. It’s not an excuse for protectionism.
When drugs are found to be dangerous by the FDA they are disallowed. The government doesn’t say “let’s use these dangerous products to raise revenue and soak the pharmaceutical companies with a tax!”
I don’t know how much “special interest” was involved here, but didn’t Obama pledge to get “sperical interest” out of Washington? Whether there was a lobbying group involved here or not, the results are the same, in this case a tariff. Does Obama realise what “special interest” are doing and why did he want it out of Washington? In this sense I would say Obama is not as smart as I thought during the campaign.
You may not have known but that only applied to getting lobbyist out of the government. But wait that only applies to the lobbyist he doesn’t like. If you are union or community organizer than you are ok. First round has been fired in the tariff war, lets see what happens next.
“The blinders of delusion began shredding away from my face in the 60s, and were totally gone by the time I retired from the military.”
vidyohs
Let me finish that for you.
“The blinders of delusion began shredding away from my face in the 60s, and were totally gone by the time I retired from the military.
Yeah because it was then, once I had a government pension and government subsidized food and apparel and government health care, life insurance, a GI Bill and VHA housing loan… it was then… like a bolt of lighting burning my brain… then I realized what an independent man I had become and how wasteful the government was… With its stealing from my wages and forcing me to pay for things for others at the point of a gun. Yeah that’s when I became a “MinarcMan …with a government pension”.
….hehhehe….you crack me up vidyohs.
Speaking of Chihuahuas. You remind me of one funny incident I saw while walking through Haight -Ashbury area of San Francisco.
A professional dog walker had no less then 8 dogs on a leash. The lead dog was a small Chihuahua and the dogs on the leash behind him were progressively bigger with a German Shepherd and a Rottweiler bringing up the rear. They came upon 2 large Great Danes walking in their direction on the path. The dog walkers stopped 20 feet apart to avoid a confrontation. The lead Chihuahua barked and barked at the two large Danes as if to say , “The only reason I’m not tearing you two limb from limb is because Im stuck on this here leash”. The Danes just looked on inquisitively at the smallish if disproportionately loud little feller. Wishing to avoid a confrontation on the narrow path the professional walker called his dogs to about face and to retreat back up the path. They all did except for the Chihuahua who was so busy threatening the to Danes he didn’t hear the command. Eventually he felt a tug on his leash and turned to realize the other eight dogs were no longer behind him. He stopped his barking…looked back at the Danes in terror and then yelped and tucked tail to get to the front of his pack and as far away from the Danes as he could.
Yeah.. you’re that Chihuahua. He thought he was independent and bold just like you. He was funny … just like you.
Muirgeo,
What does you comment have to do with the question posed by vidyohs about checks and balances?
Are you implying he is unable to ask this question because of his military career and the benefits he has received and is incapable of being an independent thinker? I am confused?
Surfisto,
LOL, not half as much as muriduck.
There is a big difference between fringe benefits and government handouts. Everything a veteran receives from the government is earned compensation, not socialist big government handouts. Anyone who thinks the military personnel are overcompensated is free to join them.
How are government jobs not handouts by Libertarian standards? What of all those in the public service who are said to make more than what they would for the equivalent work in the private sector and can expect a guaranteed retirement income which the private sector can’t provide?
I look at it this way. 1 Krispy Kreme donut can be really delicious. A dozen is just plain bad. Most would agree that four or five are pretty bad. There is a cutoff line of diminishing returns that varies from person to person. In truth, mine is 2, although it’s tough not to chase that second one hoping the third will be just as good.
What George, our good doctor, is telling us is that 20 Krispy Kremes are perfectly fine.
The military is one of very few government jobs Libertarians agree with.
You’re joking, right?
If there is only one purpose for the existence of a state, it is collective defense. But that does not necessarily justify the existence of a state.
The problem is the government, and they are elected by the people, and the people elect them because they are taught to expect something for nothing.
And they are taught that because that’s what the government wants the people to believe.
So it’s a vicious cycle, and it’s not going to remedy itself on its own. We must break the chain somewhere!
People are taught that the last one to the trough pays.
Tell me. How can MY President possibly be construed as serving ME? Am I not an equal citizen to American Tire industry shareholders and workers?
“General welfare” my ass.
Agree 100% with the sentiment, but it was not the tire industry pushing this tariff but the Steelworkers union which represents workers at tire plants. The major US tire manufacturers source many of their less expensive tires from China so were opposed to the tariff.
The group writing to Obama included major U.S. steel companies, such as United States Steel (X.N) Corp and Nucor (NUE.N), and textile groups that have repeatedly turned to the government to keep out lower-priced imports.
Farm groups supporting the tire restrictions included the National Cotton Council, which complains of subsidized polyester competition from China, and the American Corn Growers Association and the National Farmers Union.
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssConsumerGoodsAndRetailNews/idUSN0150694220090901
I own an auto repair company, and I can tell you who this hurts the most. The people that need the up front cost of their tires to be low, aka the poor. The best tires are European or American. The Chinese tires are good for the money though, it’s nice to see people of limited means get a decent product for the money. Are thay as good? No. But now these people may make a choice between new Snow tires, (I live in Vermont) and no snow tires. $200.00 set of snow tires just went to $270.00. If you had enough money to spend $400.00 on snow tires now you still spend $400.00. Among other damage caused, this hurts the people that many in Washington claim to car the most about.
There is truth in humor, the worst part is I just found out I have an IQ of 50.
No, I agree with you that getting rid of the pit bull in the yard is not the whole solution or the final solution. Getting rid of the people who let their pit bulls escape is the solution, because if we don’t, as you say, there will just be other pitbulls.
We have no disagreement there.
I wish I knew of a remedy that was peaceful and could be implemented on the basis of logic, reason, and practicality; but, I simply have none that fit those qualifications. I don’t see the left backing down and changing their thieving immoral ways, and I ain’t sinking to their thumbsucking level, so what’s left.
I see only two options.
Our Founding Fathers tried the first way, insurrection. You see where that has gotten us. We’re right back where we started, some would even argue we’re worse off now. But, I confess, in my darker moments it sure looks appealing.
Ayn Rand showed us the second path. Withdraw, hunker down and wait for the storm to pass, then rebuild it. I wonder if she got her idea from Albert Jay Nock’s essay, “Isaiah’s Job.” I swear, I do take some comfort there.
If you get into Galt’s Gulch, I hope you’ll consider me for admission.
I am working on an essay that is Randian in nature, but I disagree that we should wait for the storm to pass, we need to make the storm happen. There is a peaceful way to do that.
My essay also fits well with A. J. Nocks.
I need to so some more work on the essay. I have made my case, but I need to flesh it out with more on the possibilities side. Once it is done, I will post it on a website.
Defense is one of the most important parts of the Government. It’s one of a short list of items in the preamble of the Constitution. Maybe you are confusing Libertarians with anarchists.