Curiouser and curiouser
We are officially in the hot, hazy doldrums of summer. In Europe, August is the most popular month to go on holiday, and the same can be said for our elected leaders in Washington.
Having done essentially nothing about the national debt or the factors that caused it, except to add to global warming through their endless posturing, blame-passing and speeches, Congress and the president have taken a “much needed” recess. Like the old saying, when the going gets tough, the tough – go to Martha’s Vineyard.
I’ll admit it: I’m jealous. I would love to go on vacation with my family. However, I have to work and live within a budget. I suppose it should be some consolation that my money is funding the vacations of our representatives and the president – at least a part of me is getting to travel!
So while Congress and the president are at recess, the rest of America will continue to work in order to fund the latest get-out-of-debt-quick scheme our leaders will think up. I just hope it doesn’t involve any barristers from Nigeria who want to “temporarily” use the Federal Reserve to complete a bank transfer, or a phone call to Cash4Gold from an “undisclosed location in Kentucky” saying they found some unwanted gold lying around.
The real losers in the American debt situation are the hard-working members of society. You know, the members of society who aren’t union leaders or community organizers.
On Aug. 10, about two dozen demonstrators protested outside Congresswoman Renee Ellmers’ office in Dunn “to change her hawkish stance on the U.S. deficit.” According to a news report, the protests were organized by MoveOn.org, the AFL-CIO and other “left-leaning” groups.
Excuse me? Left-leaning groups? Calling MoveOn.org a “left-leaning” group is like saying Adolf Hitler didn’t “particularly care” for the company of Jews.
The protesters called for increased federal spending to put people to work and thereby stimulate the economy. They said that the “nation has a jobs crisis, not a deficit crisis.” Obviously this flash mob wasn’t prearranged at a Mensa gathering.
They also said “more spending, such as a public works program to rebuild roads, bridges and schools, could create jobs.” One of the protesters called for FDR-like programs, such as the Works Progress Administration (WPA), to help put people back to work. I may be wrong, but I thought putting people back to work was the reason Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, at President Obama’s urging.
How did that work out for the country? In the words of our president, “Shovel-ready was not as … uh … shovel-ready as we expected.”
The WPA has been given credit it wasn’t due, especially since full employment from the Depression wasn’t reached until the end of World War II. This begs the question: why are so many Americans willing to ask the same people who hindered the economy with micromanagement to provide the solution to the problems that micromanagement created? It boggles the mind.
Perhaps it’s like what Uncle Ben told Peter Parker- with great unemployment comes great desperation. (Well, he said something like that.)
More government intervention isn’t the solution to the economic problem
Most elected leaders don’t have a clue how to balance a budget as large as the federal budget.
The numbers are so big and hard to grasp that a willing suspension of disbelief sets in and soon the elected official believes any amount less than the whole is inconsequential.
For example, many officials believe that while the deficit ceiling may be looming, a couple of hundred million, or even a billion or two, for a pet project won’t make any difference to the aggregate ceiling amount of $14.3 trillion.
On second thought, maybe it is cheaper for Congress and the president to be on vacation. They are spending my money, but at least they aren’t taking any more.
As I close, I believe that Tweedledee, from Through the Looking Glass, has a word about going to the government for an economic solution: Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn’t, it ain’t.
Spoken like a true politician – without the global warming side effects, that is.