Imagine if you took vitamins in moderation, ate a healthy diet, exercised regularly, and got enough rest.\u00a0 Now, imagine you have gotten ill, due to exposure to something that has challenged your immune system, or some unexpected toxic exposure.<\/p>\n
Imagine someone who told you that your good habits are what made you sick, that you’ve overdone all that health stuff, and you need to develop a few new vices and ease off the healthy lifestyle.\u00a0 Imagine that person never mentioned the possibility of bacteria or virus as the cause of your illness, and when it was pointed out as the likely reason, simply denied that germs or toxic exposure have anything to do with being sick.<\/p>\n
What would you think of the judgment of someone who gave you the following advice?<\/p>\n
1)\u00a0 You should stop eating a healthy diet.\u00a0 Eat more fat, salt, sugar and alcohol.\u00a0 And preservatives.\u00a0 You need preservatives.<\/p>\n
2)\u00a0 You sleep too much.\u00a0 Watch TV a couple extra hours each night, and still get up at the same time in the morning.\u00a0 That’ll help.<\/p>\n
3)\u00a0 Forget the supplements.\u00a0 Vitamins and minerals are overrated, and may be hurting you.\u00a0 You should smoke or something.<\/p>\n
4)\u00a0 When you get well, for pity’s sake knock off the aerobic exercise and weight-lifting.\u00a0 You’ll do yourself a mischief.<\/p>\n
Is this making sense to you?\u00a0 Or would you suspect that maybe your friend owned stock in a tobacco company, or had a Twinkie franchise?\u00a0 Or maybe just hated you?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
At a minimum, even assuming the good intentions of the advice giver, you would have to assume that he or she was ignorant to nine decimal places about how the human body actually works.\u00a0 How would you feel if you could not discern whether the person giving you this advice was a fool, or actually wanted to hurt you?<\/p>\n
So.<\/p>\n
The Democrat Party and Obama want us to believe that the reason we are in economic hard times is because George Bush cut taxes, the stock market went UP for six years, the national economy built jobs, and unemployment went DOWN for six years.\u00a0 The truth, to anyone with a smidgen of economic knowledge and who can read, is that our economic hard times are based mainly on three things:<\/p>\n
1)\u00a0 Failure to produce oil domestically, so that the oil speculators could not cause so much harm.\u00a0 There is no possibility of a “speculative bubble” for something that is not in shortage to start with.<\/p>\n
2)\u00a0 Federal pressure on Fannie Mae\/Freddie Mac to guarantee loans to unqualified borrowers (mostly Democrat inspired, although some Republicans are also to blame…\u00a0 not many, though).\u00a0 While it’s easy to blame Wall Street financial shenanigans in bundling loans for resale, improperly rating securities, etc., NONE of that would have been possible without the Congressional pressure (again, largely Democrat inspired, with some exceptions) to make bad loans in the first place.<\/p>\n
3)\u00a0 Federal overspending in the last six years.\u00a0 Blame here attaches to both parties.\u00a0 There was often a feeling that the only way Republicans could get Democrat support for necessary spending was to approve Democrat pork, and some Republicans were pork-meisters themselves.\u00a0 Pork is poison, costing far more than its “face value”, because pork distribution is used to get senators and congressmen to vote for other, far larger and more costly government programs.\u00a0 When you see 100 million in pork (small potatoes, it may seem, compared to the whole budget), it may represent 10-20 billion in spending deals that the pork bought.\u00a0 We had 10-20 BILLION in pork in too many of the last budget years.\u00a0 Guess how many HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS in spending that pork greased?<\/p>\n
The Democrat Party and Obama want us to believe that raising taxes on business and the wealthy, while giving money to people who pay no taxes, or only a little, will aid the economy.\u00a0 (Consider: what will help people more, a secure job in a growing economy, or a $1000 federal giveaway each year?) \u00a0 They want us to believe that a trillion dollars in spending, in new entitlements and government programs\/giveaways, will help the economy.<\/p>\n
No credible economist of any political stripe believes that government can tax and spend its way out of economic hard times. \u00a0 Economists who know anything about it now acknowledge that tax hikes, tariff raises, and government spending lengthened the Great Depression of the 1930s, despite urban legends of being rescued by FDR’s New Deal.<\/p>\n
That’s it.\u00a0 It is deadly to make ANY tax increase during an economic downturn, especially<\/em> on the class of people who MUST invest if we want the economy to grow. \u00a0 It just won’t work.\u00a0 Obama has shown no willingness to adjust his economic plans in the light of our current situation.<\/p>\n We desperately need to accelerate nuclear power plant construction AND oil drilling in the USA, off shore, in ANWAR, western shale, etc.\u00a0 It is economically critical.\u00a0 Obama refuses….\u00a0 he wants to pursue mostly alternate energy sources, instead.\u00a0 That’s more than a bit like telling the half-starved patient that he shouldn’t eat that fatty meat and mashed potatoes he can have soon, but should wait for the vegetable garden to mature next summer, so he can eat healthily.\u00a0 While waiting for all that healthy food, he may die.<\/p>\n We have to get the federal government out of the loan business.\u00a0 Social engineering, trying to get people who aren’t ready into mortgages they can’t afford, is a large part of the current problem.\u00a0 The laws of economics cannot be repealed, regardless of government’s “good intentions”.\u00a0 Those laws are as reliable as gravity, and as unforgiving.<\/p>\n Federal spending is so far out of control that it’s difficult to imagine how to reduce it.\u00a0 Yet we must try.\u00a0 A place to start:\u00a0 rigidly enforce a simple rule that spending may not increase more than 2% from one year to the next.\u00a0 Period.\u00a0 Regardless of what entitlement program must have its growth slightly restricted.\u00a0 If we do that, our typical growth rate in the economy (on the order of 3.5% to 4%) will allow us to simply grow out of the problem, in about 20 years.<\/p>\n I wonder if, instead of living a healthy lifestyle, and instead of going to the doctor when ill, Obama just buys a nice box of leeches and drains a little blood to remove the “ill humours”.\u00a0\u00a0 That’s about the level of intellectual integrity to be found in his economic plans.\u00a0 He’s going to be tacking a LOT of leeches onto the national economy, if he gets his way.\u00a0 As I recall, leeches are believed to have accelerated the death of George Washington.\u00a0 If Obama’s economic strategy is tried, bills with Washington’s picture may be the only ones we have left.<\/p>\nShare this:<\/h3>