Stimulus....EPIC failure!

Don't be fooled by slick democrat spin about how great the Stimulus plan was for America's economy....it wasn't.....

From Heartland.org -- We’ve just passed the second anniversary of “economic stimulus” under President Obama. Aside from spending on the stimulus itself - the actual price tag soon climbed from $787 billion to $821 billion - not much else has been stimulated.

Nearly a trillion dollars have been poured into the U.S. economy, courtesy of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Result? Unemployment has barely budged, housing prices continue to fall in many markets and more mortgages slip into foreclosure.

The moronic Keynesian philosophy of economic stimulus to which democrats subscribe, absurdly claims that government spending is the best way to increase economic activity. You'd have to be clinically retarded not to see that nothing could be further from the truth. The government doesn't have a penny of money of it's own. For every single dollar the government "spends", it's first got to take that dollar away from somebody who earned it. So even a ditsy porn star coming off a 3-day bender at Charlie Sheen's house could see that government stimulus, as far as the economy is concerned, is a zero-sum game. All it serves to do is redirect money away from earners to those who are politically favored, and to whom the politicians can point at election time and bleat about what they accomplished. With few exceptions government spending is bad for the economy.

Twitter might abandon SanFrancisco

Twitter is currently located in San Francisco, but not for long if the city council insists on collecting a 1.5% occupational tax for the privilege of working there. The council is debating on whether to grant Twitter a 6 year waiver in order to keep it from moving south a few miles to Brisbane where there is no occupational tax.

This encapsulates perfectly what is wrong with the US when it comes to capitalism and economic viability. Smarmy politicians think that all money belongs to them and they're doing you a favor by letting you keep some of what you earned. Punitive taxes and onerous regulations, not corporate greed, are what have driven jobs outside the country to places like Mexico, China, and India. Companies and people are leaving high-tax states in favor of low tax states where the business environment is more friendly. You'd think the high-tax states would learn eventually, but they won't. They'll just keep raising taxes on those that are left.

Econ 101

Some dope in the WSJ wrote an article wondering why this Givenchy Pierrot T-shirt had a price tag at $800?

He interviewed the store owner who offered as excuses for the price, the cotton blend of which the T-shirt is made, the attractive and seasonally popular leopard print, the exclusivity of the designer, and that only a few hundred of these will be made.

While each of these plays a role in selling the T-shirt, it's the mutually beneficial agreement between the seller and the buyer that sets the price. Obviously at $800 there are people who want the T-shirt more than they want that $800 burning a hole in their pocket, while the seller wants the money more than he wants to keep the shirt. Without this freely agreed upon deal between buyer and seller, the transaction does not take place.

Less erudite people than TRR readers will scoff that the seller is greedy or the buyer is stupid, but neither of these is provably true. Buyers and sellers acting in their own interest agree on a price for an item and a transaction is made. That's how successful economies work.....efficiently allocating resources within the consumer-equilibrating framework of supply, demand, and price.

The next time you whine about the price of something not government related, remember that somebody must be willing to pay it, or else the price would be lower, and your refusal to pay it exerts downward pressure on the price.

Democrats love to blame greedy corporations for outsourcing but it's the government from which corporations are fleeing. 3M CEO George Buckley puts it perfectly....

From FinancialTimes -- Mr Buckley, who has run the diversified manufacturer since 2005, said: “There is a sense among companies that this is a difficult place to do business. It is about regulation, taxation, seemingly anti-business policies in Washington, attitudes towards science.”

He added: “Politicians forget that business has choice. We’re not indentured servants and we will do business where it’s good and friendly. If it’s hostile, incrementally, things will slip away. We’ve got a real choice between manufacturing in Canada and Mexico – which tend to be pro-business – or America.”

The US now has the highest corporate tax rate of all industrialized nations. The hyper-regulatory nature of our government throttles innovation, retards expansion, and punishes success. Additionally, political correctness thwarts competition with quotas, set-asides, and preferential treatment for the undeserving. Frankly I'm shocked that we have any companies still doing business here. If the regulations aren't rescinded, taxes drastically lowered, and free-market competition allowed to work it's magic, the US economy is unalterable destined for moribundity...if it's not there already.

Should teachers be paid more than NBA stars?

With all the petulant, misbehaving union teachers in Wisconsin and other places agitating to retain their lavish salary and benefits packages, we regularly hear the question from the media, "Why should pro athletes make so much money for playing a game when teachers are far more valuable to society?"

The short answer is that unless the government sets salaries of all people the way communist governments do, then the labor market dictates how much each person is paid for their work. Nobody is paid according to his value to society. We are worth only how much our employer is willing to pay us.

There are only about 150 starters in the NBA. That's a pretty exclusive club and only a certain number of people are capable of doing what they do. There are 150 people capable of being teachers in practically every neighborhood in America. I'm not saying teachers aren't valuable to society, but if a teacher quits, there are hundreds of people who would be willing to take her place. It's based on the dynamics of supply, demand, and price.

The average salary of Madison, WI teachers is $100,000. That's because the unions and collective bargaining extorted these absurd salary contracts from city councils and school boards. If the free labor market were allowed to function, they would be making a more reasonable $50,000 a year, contributing to their own retirement, and paying a portion of their own health care, the same as everybody else. Public sector unions and their thug tactics are why most states are going bankrupt and it's why governors are trying to reign them in.  

Should the F-35 get cut too?

Now here's a budget item on the chopping block that is near and dear to many TRR readers' hearts. The $435 million proposed new-engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Questions:

-Does the F-35 need new engines or is this just a jobs program for Boehner's district in Ohio where they are built? It seems there is discord between the military and politicians as to the necessity of an engine upgrade.
-Why can't the F-15, F-16, F-22, and F-117 platforms be upgraded instead?
-With the tactical successes of far cheaper drone aircraft, how much need is there for cutting-edge manned aircraft, going forward?
-Isn't it the purpose of most defense spending to support the vast military-industrial complex in politically favored districts? And if so, why not continue to manufacture and sell existing platforms to our allies and not force taxpayers to pay for unnecessary upgrades until ours really need it?

Everything should be on the table for cuts....everything!

As you can see, discretionary spending only accounts for about 18% of the federal spending budget. We could certainly streamline the military budget by getting out of every God-forsaken country's business we don't belong in and generally reducing the overall size, but still that won't make much of a dent in the debt going forward.

Clearly, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid need to be revamped, the recipients need to expect less, and the eligibility guidelines need to be extended especially for SS.

We need to raise the retirement age to 72, immediately. Social Security recipients who are already retired will be grandfathered in, but anybody who's further than 5 years from retiring should be told that their politicians have been flat-out lying to them for decades, making a promise that they cannot keep. They should be told that their benefits will be reduced and they should start planning for alternate supplements to their retirement income. For those of us still a decade or two from retirement, tough s#%t!

As for Medicaid, if we remove the barriers and allow insurance companies to sell policies anywhere in the US, the price for tailer-made policies would come down fast and dramatically. With affordable policies available, far fewer people would then be relying on other Americans for their medical upkeep.

Politically, no politician wants to reduce or eliminate a government benefit on which Americans have come to rely, but that's exactly what's got to happen. Term limits on teat-sucking politicians would go a long way toward helping them make hard, unpopular decisions. If they aren't seeking re-election, why not make the right vote instead of the expedient vote?

Social Security crash starts this year, not in 2016

It's news to only the stupidest of Americans that politicians have been lying to us for decades about social security. The nonpartisan congressional budget office announced today that the SS deficit starts this year, not 5 years down the road like we've been told......

From CBSNews -- (AP) Social Security's finances are getting worse as the economy struggles to recover and millions of baby boomers stand at the brink of retirement.

New congressional projections show Social Security running deficits every year until its trust funds are eventually drained in about 2037.

This year alone, Social Security is projected to collect $45 billion less in payroll taxes than it pays out in retirement, disability and survivor benefits, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

I got my annual SS statement last weekend that projects what I would be getting each month at various points in retirement, more if I delay retiring and less if I retire at 59 or whatever. I had to chuckle at the lie that was staring me right in the face. If I decide to retire at 65, I am promised something like $3,000 a month in SS benefits. But that's 17 years away. Is there anybody dumb enough to think that if SS is sinking fast this year that there will be anything left when I get there? The year of complete insolvency for SS is projected to be 2037 but with baby-boom voters retiring with massive senses of entitlement to all that money and the implied threat to kick anybody out of office who dares suggest a cut in benefits, there won't be anything for me when I get there. Heaven help my kids...it'll be even worse for them.

Feckless congress is about to raise the debt ceiling again

The tea-party republicans in the house have a big decision coming up that'll tell us how serious they are about upholding the conservative, constitutional principles on which they got elected....

From Bloomberg -- Austan Goolsbee, chairman of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers, said if Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the “impact on the economy would be catastrophic.”

“I don’t see why anybody’s playing chicken with the debt ceiling,” Goolsbee said today on ABC’s “This Week” program. “If we get to the point where we damage the full faith and credit of the United States, that would be the first default in history caused purely by insanity.”

The government is slated to hit the legal limit on borrowing, $14.3 trillion, early this year. Congress must agree to raise that ceiling or the U.S. could be forced to default on its obligations.

Cutting spending is always the last thing these guys consider as a means of reducing the deficit. I'll wager that any house republicans that vote to raise the debt ceiling without concomitant or bigger, spending cuts, will meet stiff challenges to their positions in 2012. And deservedly so. We didn't elect these guys to go along with Obama's spending demands. They were elected to cut the spending, reduce the deficit, and cut taxes, not give them more room to spend money they don't have.

This jackass Goolsbee thinks that not raising the ceiling would be catastrophic, but raising the ceiling is the same as you or me being $100,000 in credit-card debt and rather than stop spending, we just get another VISA with a $10,000 credit limit on it. How is that not the most catastrophic move?

Throwing good money after bad

You thought the bank bailouts and TARP were over? They aren't over....

From the WSJ via Hotair -- Nearly 100 U.S. banks that got bailout funds from the federal government show signs they are in jeopardy of failing.

The total, based on an analysis of third-quarter financial results by The Wall Street Journal, is up from 86 in the second quarter, reflecting eroding capital levels, a pileup of bad loans and warnings from regulators. The 98 banks in shaky condition got more than $4.2 billion in infusions from the Treasury Department under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Democrats can't, but even the stupidest econ 101 student can tell you that when you subsidize failure, you get more failure. Rewarding reckless, failed bankers with free money tells these guys that they can keep engaging in the bad banking practices as before, without penalty....just as rewarding guys like Barney Frank, the criminally derelict author of the banking/housing collapse, with re-election tells him that he can repeat his awful decisions without penalty.

I swear, if we taxpayers have to fund another round of bank bailouts, only to watch the corrupt executives reward themselves with enormous bonuses of our money, I'll go ahead and declare this country officially done.

Taxpayers don't cost the government, government costs the taxpayers

I'm watching the news this morning and for like the 100th time, I hear some half-witted reporter refer to the extension of tax cuts as "costing the government". Am I the only one who sees the outrageous idiocy in that statement?

To say that letting citizens keep a little more of the money they earned costs the government, you have to believe that all income first belongs to the government and it decides how much of it you can keep each year. Democrats and the media act as if we long suffering Americans are committing some egregious crime against our country by wanting to keep a few dollars more of our paychecks. They treat us as if we're being greedy by not wanting our income taken from us to be given to some poor, unworthy slob in exchange for a reliable democrat vote.

The government exists at the pleasure and consent of the governed, not the other way around. If we decide through our representatives to keep more of our paychecks by lowering taxes, then the government is obligated to reduce it's spending by at least that much. That's the definition of fiscal conservatism and responsibility, a concept with which few politicians are familiar.

GM is still Government Motors

I'm finding it a little hard to get excited about GM's return to the NYSE.....

DETROIT — General Motors returned to life as a public company Thursday, launching a stock offering worth potentially $23 billion and ending the government’s role as majority shareholder and closing a remarkable chapter in American corporate history.

I'll still never buy another GM car....ever. The unions and bloated management that ran this company into the ground and who were rewarded with unconstitutional ownership of the company by Obama, are still there and intact. What's stopping them from whining about another bailout in 5 years? Nothing's changed.

"Quantitative easing" explained in animation

So I'm sure all you well-informed TRR readers have heard the curious phrase "quantitative easing". It's the nebulous name given to the process by which Ben Bernanke and the Fed, along with Goldman-Sachs, attempt to further damage the US economy by intentionally increasing inflation by printing money out of thin air. Instead of a tedious explanation of quantitative easing, here's a helpful animation that does the job. [WARNING: mild language]



The cronyism and utter corruption of our overlords is horrifying! The sad thing is that congress knows of the fleecing of America by the Fed and Goldman/Sachs and doesn't care. Average citizens are powerless to oppose our economic rape at the hands of secretive bankers who operate extraconstitutionally and above any law.

Thanks to Van Helsing over at Moonbattery for the vid.

CEO to union thugs...."You're fired!"

My less than enthusiastic opinion of labor unions is well known to TRR readers. Unions are more or less useless in today's economic climate with all the government oversight and such. That said, it always pleases me when a company that is hamstrung by greedy union thugs and their ridiculous demands for lavish pay and benefits, tells the union where to stick it and leaves the area to set up shop in a right-to-work state.....

The Olin Corp. said Wednesday that it will put its money where its mouth is — in Mississippi.

A day after union workers rejected for a second time a contract that might have saved their jobs, the Metro East company told them it was moving about 1,000 ammunition production jobs from Metro East to Oxford, Miss.

As members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers District 9 left the East Alton catering hall where the ballots were tallied Tuesday night, more than a few of the employees ventured that Olin was bluffing.

I'm not enjoying the fact that 1,000 Missourians will lose their jobs, but sudden unemployment is the risk you run by trying to force your employer to pay you more than he thinks you're worth and shower you with absurdly generous benefits to which you aren't entitled.

Labor is like any other commodity. It is subject to the laws of supply, demand, and price as defined by the free market. Any meddling or manipulation of those relationships by collective bargaining is wrong. Unions are bad for the American economy and bad for America.

College grads second guessing that vote for Hope and Change

Over at Sweetness&Light, I found this interesting statistic.....unable to find work, 85% of college grads plan to move back in with their parents. Back to their same, tiny bed, same annoyingly early curfew, and same high-school chore list.

The article highlights a recent Penn State grad who got a degree in public relations but can't find a job relating to the public, and had to move back in with her mom. Predictably, they both voted for Obama.

She's got two problems: the first one was choosing a Big 10 school....I mean seriously! Secondly, who told her there were jobs in public relations? You might as well be a middle manager at a payday loan store....i.e. you don't produce anything. You just manage those who do and therefor you get laid off first when the economy is bad.

Even a cursory review of job-market demand would have steered her in the direction of nursing or other health care-related or technical fields, accounting, or professional degrees in the legal or medical fields. There is always demand for nurses.

If you don't want to move back home, choose a career field in which there are jobs waiting. Just because you think you would enjoy and be good at something doesn't mean that you can find work doing it right out of school.

We deserve to be taken advantage of by China

Politicians want to blame China for our economic mess, but it's not their fault.....

From Telegraph.co.uk -- China warns US against making yuan dispute a 'scapegoat' for a flagging economy

While China may be guilty of currency manipulation to take advantage of the weak dollar, we recklessly put ourselves in the position to be taken advantage of. When half of the population of a country clamors for lavish social and benefits programs at the expense of the other half and craven politicians line up to provide it to them in exchange for votes, naturally your economy will suffer. And since we participate in a world market, we're ripe for predation by countries who're smarter and more disciplined than us.

Any country who evolves to the point where it toils under a big government and small economy rather than thriving with a big economy and small government, is in willful decline as an economic power. We deserve to be taken advantage of by China.

Corrupt democrats want to unionize the entire country

Right-to-work laws allow employees of unionized companies to opt out of the union and retain their jobs if they wish. Most of the industrial states in the US are "forced-dues" states, that is, if you don't want to be in the labor union, the union thugs can have you fired. Doesn't seem very American now does it? As we know, union thuggery goes hand in hand with democrat politics....

Today, democrat Congressman Brad Sherman announced the introduction of dramatic legislation that would eliminate so-called “right-to-work” laws, which was applauded by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka. Sherman has a strong record of supporting working men and women and earned a 100% rating from the AFL-CIO.

Looking at the map above, notice how the forced-dues states are the ones in the most fiscal trouble. Coincidence? I don't think so. This thug democrat Sherman wants to allow the forced unionization of literally every business in America.

Don't think this election is important enough to get out and vote? Think again.

Coming to America?

While the rest of the world struggles with raising the retirement ages to account for exploding numbers of retirees, increasing life expectancy, and fewer workers to support the retired, lazy, good-for-nothing Frenchmen are striking because Sarkozy want to raise their retirement age by two lousy years.....

From Yahoo -- PARIS – French authorities estimated nearly 1 million protesters filled the streets Thursday to try to force President Nicolas Sarkozy to drop his plan to raise the retirement age two years to 62, while strikes also disrupted airports, train stations and schools for the second time this month.

The protest movement has been a big test for Sarkozy, who, like other European leaders, has struggled to convince his country of the need for cost-cutting and scaling back generous social benefits after the Greek debt crisis scared markets and sapped confidence in the entire 16-nation euro currency.

I swear, if there is a lazier or more entitlement-minded population than those in France, I don't know what it is. The unions in America remind me of these French deadbeats. Our union workers expect guaranteed jobs at absurdly high wages with lavish health and retirement benefits at a low retirement age. As Obama does everything in his power to increase the union membership roles, how long before they have enough political power to dictate retirement and social security policy in the US?

Government mandated stupidity

The last plant that manufactures light bulbs in America will close it's doors at the end of this month putting 200 Americans out of work. Not because there is no demand for its product, but because the imperial socialist government has mandated it in order to be slavishly obedient to the environmentalist morons who actually believe in global warming, despite the fact that the Earth is cooling.

Obama preposterously lectures us about all the jobs he's saved or created, even though the unemployment rate continues to rise near 10%. An observant news consumer might ask, "Where are the green-jobs that Obama promised, building compact fluorescent bulbs to replace the incandescent ones they've outlawed"?

Like all of America's manufacturing base....in China of course. The new bulbs are dimmer, they flicker, are more expensive, contain dangerous amounts of mercury, and constitute a dangerous health hazard if broken or disposed of without a hazmat team. By 2014, the government mandates that all bulbs in use be stupid CFB's, even though nobody wants them. Is this the kind of country you want to live in? Me neither. Remember that when you go to the polls in a little less than 8 weeks from now.

Libs don't like hearing the truth

Apparently Sen. Alan Simpson hurt somebody's feelings....

Directly from Neal Boortz -- It seems Alan Simpson sent an email to the executive director of some outfit called the National Older Women's League. Her name is Ashley Carson. In the email he compared Social Security to "a milk cow with 310 million tits!" Responding to a column Carson wrote in the Huffington Post, Simpson writes: "I've spent many years in public life trying to stabilize that system while people like you babble into the vapors about 'disgusting attempts at ageism and sexism' and all the rest of that crap." He then signed the letter, "Call when you get honest work!"

Democrats are crying for his removal from Obama's debt commission for his insensitivity. I say give him a promotion. He's absolutely right. Social Security was never intended to totally fund the retirement of every American, yet most spend all their money living large and then expect other Americans who're still working to maintain for them, the lavish life-styles to which they've grown accustomed. Social Security is little more than a legal Ponzi scheme in which money taken from workers today, gets paid directly to retirees today. At some point there won't be enough workers to fund the retirements of everybody who demands it.

Was Simpson harsh? Yes. Was he right? Absolutely!