I was sorry to see that my friends in the Tea Party took upon themselves the misguided recall effort. As a former member on the board of directors with Oroville Youth Soccer and a coach and grandfather of several very good players currently on rosters, I was happy to see that “our” misdirected energies failed.
The Tea Party stands for limited government and careful scrutiny over limited funds. Our Founders created a government, so their intention could never be construed to be “no government”. The fact is, limited government requires the emphasis be placed on local government.
In this case the Tea Party members who brought on this recall lost track of what the opposite of big government is. I would never presume to negate the instruments (recall as one), which are required to facilitate what can no longer be influenced by debate, law or election. However, by its very nature, recall is a strong-arm, big government tactic. It is a request for a certain population and community to war with each other, then return to harmony. Works really good at the state and federal level but not so much with the family paradigm. And listen, when you are trying to remove your neighbor, well, not so much either. You see, in that case, coming before your neighbor with a petition or challenge to expurgate board or council action where misappropriation was alleged seems ill advised from my perspective. My Tea Party members should have gone after city council that are acting like big government zealots who seem to have acquired a taste for power. In any event, at any level, but at least here in my hometown of Oroville, CA (I’m a 60 year resident), if you want to effect change at Parks & Rec, follow my example and work with the board, or get yourself elected, to realize the change you desire.
Real grassroots effort is the key to change. I use that brand of politics everyday as I try to have a conversation with my neighbors and friends on my blog, on Facebook and in letters to the editor. Yes, I am considered by a few folks to be pragmatic and contemptuous. Both very good attributes to posses in grassroots campaigns. But, I have been out of the community’s focus, as a whole, for more than a year. Nothing like a bit of controversy to get “Old Bob’s” juices going again.
My friends in the Tea Party wanted a recall. I asserted early on that it was not a good idea. I advised those substantial numbers of folks I am regularly in contact with to decline the request to sign. That is grassroots my friends and you ought to learn from your failure.
But I still love you!
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Sunday, February 12, 2012
JOBS AND GOVERNMENT CREATIONISM
In the Feb. 11th edition of the Oroville Mercury-Register, (www.orovillemr.com/opinion/ci_19943259) a letter writer named Neil Dougherty of Chico stated, well, in a round-about way, that us whining sniveling job creators were just an “illusion". Do I have that right Neil?
Now I agree that government sometimes “acts” like a partner. However, history, contrary to Neil’s assertions, shows government acts badly at best and meddlesome in the worst cases.
But Creationism? Really Neil? Are you really going there? This demonstrates your total lack of understanding of what it takes to create a job. Of coarse socialists like you don’t like the creation of wealth because that just isn’t fair. You know, the old socialist dogma that states, “If a man gets wealthy, he must have stolen it”. Never mind the years of education and 20 hour days of intense individual labor to put in place the foundation to create even one job for another human being. I will give you, that the government can be instrumental in education, but as a side note, for many, not all or even most, but many, hardly beneficial.
Now, as to government creating jobs? Look Neil, I get that there are “jobs” in government. But what are we talking about here? Creation, right? The day you can prove government creates a job is the day you get to sell me some swampland. As a preference, can you make that Florida and not Louisiana, just incase I‘ve lost the point somehow. But here is my point incase you are already distracted, as good socialists are prone to do. You buy into the myth that government creates, without reasoning through it. Where do you suppose that government gets the capital to produce even a single job? Yep, I have the answer for you because just about now, you socialists are starting to sweat because you know your bluff has just been called and all the uneducated who are voting your heroes in, are just about to get an education, and I’m sorry (not) for being patronizing, but you can come along with them.
So, the money flow. Where’s it come from?
First, let's recognize the current leader!
Taxation! That means I have to earn it first as an “evil” businessman or slave in the trenches. Either way, it is taken from us, I like to think, “stolen”, but you call it whatever you want. In so doing they diminish the taxpayers ability to consume goods and services. Funny how that happens, but it gets worse. Now I have a decreased chance to save money. Economic improvement is only possible through savings and investment per capita, the only true method of job creation and wealth creation. But hey, government “created “ jobs, at least under your definition.
Well, thanks, but no thanks.
Secondly, Oh wow! They can create capital out of thin air. Just print a whole wad.
Here again, and a science term you socialist don’t like us capitalists to talk about, the “Law of Unintended Consequences”. See, did you get that. The base word is “intention” and I believe you socialist are well intended. Your outcomes always leave a bunch to be desired. You don’t like my “selfish” intentions so you call me “evil” even though the outcome is to give you a job, and no worries, I’ll still ignore you calling me a “one percenter” even though your heroes make a magnitude by ten more than myself. But that money that you just ask our government to “create” out of thin air just increased the cost of money, that which I was going to borrow in order to create two additional positions in my company and likewise every thousand additional companies by two. But we didn’t, couldn’t and wouldn’t and you thought it was the government that created that job, but the job was stolen from my company that would have made something that “my friend”, you Neil, wanted to buy. But money supply was not available because some guy was leaning on a shovel out on the highway on a job the government “produced”. No offense highwaymen! Of course, that nice smooth road out there in Durham, CA. (Farmland for you less advised) was less than urgent on the “consumer scale of values” and the inflationary mal-investment-projects can’t really be sustained. The short term boom of government jobs turns into a bust, causing widespread unemployment. It was an artificial boom that diverted true production from the consumers most urgent desires.
And the outcome? Inflation. Thanks!
Sure there is another way. The government can sell bonds on the open market.
Now Neil, most likely, with your high falut’un, holier-than-thou, socialist agenda, you want the government to remove money from the marketplace. That is the result, intended or not., but likely in the socialists perfect world, intended. The additional result: It diverts savings from profitable free enterprise ventures (I know Neil, you read vulture) into government coffers. What a tragedy as investors seek “safety” in government T-Bills. Really? The government might just allow us a quarter when it is at 1.9%. Is that where your money is Neil? Well shazam, no wonder you are angry at us whiners.
The most unintended consequence? Government endeavors are expensive and wasteful because they are run by bureaucratic rules and regulations. Business operates by the profit motive. Have you ever seen a government bureaucracy go out of “business”? Nope, they want more money. That creates a net decrease in jobs created. In other words, government meddling in the job market eliminates more jobs than it “creates" by hampering the markets ability to create employment.
Hope you enjoyed my sarcastic humor, but I truly mean no ill-will. Just having fun with you, Neil, seriously!
Now I agree that government sometimes “acts” like a partner. However, history, contrary to Neil’s assertions, shows government acts badly at best and meddlesome in the worst cases.
But Creationism? Really Neil? Are you really going there? This demonstrates your total lack of understanding of what it takes to create a job. Of coarse socialists like you don’t like the creation of wealth because that just isn’t fair. You know, the old socialist dogma that states, “If a man gets wealthy, he must have stolen it”. Never mind the years of education and 20 hour days of intense individual labor to put in place the foundation to create even one job for another human being. I will give you, that the government can be instrumental in education, but as a side note, for many, not all or even most, but many, hardly beneficial.
Now, as to government creating jobs? Look Neil, I get that there are “jobs” in government. But what are we talking about here? Creation, right? The day you can prove government creates a job is the day you get to sell me some swampland. As a preference, can you make that Florida and not Louisiana, just incase I‘ve lost the point somehow. But here is my point incase you are already distracted, as good socialists are prone to do. You buy into the myth that government creates, without reasoning through it. Where do you suppose that government gets the capital to produce even a single job? Yep, I have the answer for you because just about now, you socialists are starting to sweat because you know your bluff has just been called and all the uneducated who are voting your heroes in, are just about to get an education, and I’m sorry (not) for being patronizing, but you can come along with them.
So, the money flow. Where’s it come from?
First, let's recognize the current leader!
Taxation! That means I have to earn it first as an “evil” businessman or slave in the trenches. Either way, it is taken from us, I like to think, “stolen”, but you call it whatever you want. In so doing they diminish the taxpayers ability to consume goods and services. Funny how that happens, but it gets worse. Now I have a decreased chance to save money. Economic improvement is only possible through savings and investment per capita, the only true method of job creation and wealth creation. But hey, government “created “ jobs, at least under your definition.
Well, thanks, but no thanks.
Secondly, Oh wow! They can create capital out of thin air. Just print a whole wad.
Here again, and a science term you socialist don’t like us capitalists to talk about, the “Law of Unintended Consequences”. See, did you get that. The base word is “intention” and I believe you socialist are well intended. Your outcomes always leave a bunch to be desired. You don’t like my “selfish” intentions so you call me “evil” even though the outcome is to give you a job, and no worries, I’ll still ignore you calling me a “one percenter” even though your heroes make a magnitude by ten more than myself. But that money that you just ask our government to “create” out of thin air just increased the cost of money, that which I was going to borrow in order to create two additional positions in my company and likewise every thousand additional companies by two. But we didn’t, couldn’t and wouldn’t and you thought it was the government that created that job, but the job was stolen from my company that would have made something that “my friend”, you Neil, wanted to buy. But money supply was not available because some guy was leaning on a shovel out on the highway on a job the government “produced”. No offense highwaymen! Of course, that nice smooth road out there in Durham, CA. (Farmland for you less advised) was less than urgent on the “consumer scale of values” and the inflationary mal-investment-projects can’t really be sustained. The short term boom of government jobs turns into a bust, causing widespread unemployment. It was an artificial boom that diverted true production from the consumers most urgent desires.
And the outcome? Inflation. Thanks!
Sure there is another way. The government can sell bonds on the open market.
Now Neil, most likely, with your high falut’un, holier-than-thou, socialist agenda, you want the government to remove money from the marketplace. That is the result, intended or not., but likely in the socialists perfect world, intended. The additional result: It diverts savings from profitable free enterprise ventures (I know Neil, you read vulture) into government coffers. What a tragedy as investors seek “safety” in government T-Bills. Really? The government might just allow us a quarter when it is at 1.9%. Is that where your money is Neil? Well shazam, no wonder you are angry at us whiners.
The most unintended consequence? Government endeavors are expensive and wasteful because they are run by bureaucratic rules and regulations. Business operates by the profit motive. Have you ever seen a government bureaucracy go out of “business”? Nope, they want more money. That creates a net decrease in jobs created. In other words, government meddling in the job market eliminates more jobs than it “creates" by hampering the markets ability to create employment.
Hope you enjoyed my sarcastic humor, but I truly mean no ill-will. Just having fun with you, Neil, seriously!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
