Littlestuff Weekender-4-16-2011

My first two days back into the radio world have gone reasonably well…though they should be much better as time goes on. Shaggy, Katie, Jenny and Jamie have been very patient with an old timer whose broadcasting and timing skills have somewhat atrophied. For those of you who enjoy rubber-necking at accidents, we are on 1370 WSPD (AM) Wednesday and Friday from 6:05 pm to 6:57:50pm with “Eye on Toledo”…even though we discuss area, regional, state, national, global and intergalactic issues as well. Please join us, if you can.

It’s really great to see that the campaign to convince more theaters to show “Atlas Shrugged, Part I,” has been rather successful. Last that I checked, they’ve gone from 12 markets to more than a hundred. Is Rand’s philosophy perfect? No. Given the oppressive natures of despotism and tyranny, her emphasis on rugged individualism and societal, governmental, and jealous interventionism offers a clearer cleaner path to humane living. Oppression sucks the humanity out of us more thoroughly than selfishness does. Selfishness can develop into enlightened self interest whereas oppression becomes more oppressive. As an example, many considered Andrew Carnegie to be somewhat of a robber baron because of his harsh business practices. He is the one, however, who built libraries in many small communities across the land. Once oppression gains the upper hand, it does not soften its approach. It may be overthrown, but an oppressive state does not voluntarily become a sweetie.

In a similar vein, I received a very thoughtful email this morning from Mike, a reader of this column. In it he identified some governmental actions that have been positive for our prosperity and our quality of life. He also recognized various overreaches by government that suppressed opportunity, and as a result of his business experience, he encountered some variance among states that made it nearly impossible to conduct commerce on a national scale. His analysis is similar to what many of us have gone through as we try to find the perfect balance between freedom and responsibility. Consider a family Thanksgiving dinner. There may be 40-60 people assembled together….blood kin, in-laws and outlaws. Some of them you absolutely love and adore. You are rather fond of some others, and are annoyed by another portion. Bottom line is that you are all different even though you gather under the same family banner. Each of you has succeeded or stumbled as you have traveled through life. If tragedy or misfortune should strike, you would go to the wall for one another. How would the family dynamic be altered if the patriarch or matriarch ruled with an iron hand? What would happen if the successful were constantly FORCED to carry the water for the lazy or unfortunate ones? The family can function reasonably well if the interactions among the members are allowed to develop naturally, but when they are enforced or choreographed, they falter. I do owe Mike a more thorough response, and he will get it sometime next week.

Ayn Rand and Mike lead me to the conclusion that the path I now seek, total restoration of constitutional government, is the right one. I would rather err on the side of inefficient liberty than to be controlled and limited by efficient or fair tyranny. Besides, government is never efficient or fair…merely tyrannical. One-stop shopping wherein the government limits competition and choice is often frustrating and unsatisfying. So, give me the chaos of freedom where entrepreneurs start, sputter and succeed or fail rather than the consistency of big unresponsive government growing bigger and more inefficient. Bad air, snail darters and national wilderness areas may not always be priorities for a free unfettered nation, but as we prosper, we look beyond just placing food on the table and seek other ways of improving our lives. The error has been our handing those functions or desires to the government….as I usually remark…who has no heart, no mind and no soul. Once the momentum has started with government, it never knows when to stop…or back off. People working together in the private sector will set a goal, accomplish the task, and go back to their daily lives. Government continually roams the universe looking for new violators or fresh new areas that have been unregulated.

I do not trust my government.

Have a wonderful remainder of the weekender. We’ll return on Monday.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com    or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

  

Skule Daze

Last week I had a column that was a discussion opener about the role of higher education in our state and nation particularly considering the present budget problems (“Dire Education,” 4-7-2011). Today I would like to move the issue along and examine some other factors surrounding education at our colleges and universities. In the earlier column I referred to a piece by Neal McCluskey that suggested that federal government in the form of the Higher Education Act was a major cause of higher education inflation. His premise was that the government’s willingness to lavishly spread taxpayer monies around contributed to colleges and universities failing to seriously attempt cost controls.

Charles Hugh Smith of  www.OfTwoMinds.com  has written an interesting article entitled, “Students: You Are Exploited Debt-Serfs.” He describes what he calls the “Education Cartel” wherein the banks reap immediate profits at the moment they issue a loan. In addition, the college or university can receive bundles of funds from the government and the designated banks every term. Roughly 10% of those who receive direct government school payments or bank generated guaranteed payments do not graduate. So, in a sense it’s a scam that uses taxpayer dollars. The banks and the schools benefit, and students either leave school or graduate with huge debts. Added to the loan scheme is the government grant shuffle.

If a student does graduate, then he or she may end up with a $100,000 debt that cannot be eliminated via a bankruptcy. In other words, the government, the banks and the “schools of higher learning” scheme together to place the young and hopeful people of America in a situation of inescapable debt . Meanwhile the smoke and mirrors public relations campaigns continue to browbeat young people into deciding for a college education when that may not be the best choice for certain individuals. Even if college is the proper path for someone who has aspirations, why not educate and encourage the students to pursue a fiscally responsible path? A serious student can begin with a community college, take nine (9) hours per term, and work at waiting tables, serving Happy Meals or any other menial starting position and perhaps complete a degree in six or seven years with little or no debt. Who is better off…the 25 year old with a freshly minted degree and no indebtedness, or the 25 year old who has struggled in the work force for three years and continues to have the $100,000 debt plus interest hanging over her or his head? Which one has the greater peace of mind? Which of the two has the most freedom for making life’s decisions? Plus, one of the two has the certain knowledge that she or he earned the degree.

Carrying the argument forward, I submit that government involvement in the subsidization of students (through banks and schools) is unconstitutional, immoral, fiscally irresponsible, discriminatory and stupid. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution makes NO allowance for subsidizing education—higher or otherwise. It is immoral for the government to be the prime impetus for inflationary educational costs and the subsequent result that students are saddled with massive personal debt. The fiscal irresponsible factor comes into play because government overreaches, over commits, over promises and overspends. Too many of our national obligations must be met with borrowed funds because of government irresponsibility. Underwriting college educations when students should be able to devise a method for obtaining a degree without government “help” and its ultimate debt is gross fiscal irresponsibility. Funding only those who choose to go to college is discriminatory. Providing varying plans for government involvement based upon demographic factors is discriminatory. By participating in the cabal to loan money to the young so they may attend college, government becomes a major contributor to the extension of adolescence in the United States. Government dollars and Nanny State intervention help to delay the maturation process for many of our youth. A politician may like the idea because uninformed and immature voters are either indifferent or “easy picking,” but as a national policy, it is stupid and potentially deadly.

The time has come to remove the government from underwriting or funding students who wish to go to college. The costs of schooling will go down as colleges compete for private dollars from parents and students. The costs for four-year schools will drop radically as they compete with one another and with community colleges for students. The students will not face the specter of massive debt as they don their caps and gowns for a final stroll down the 50 yard line on a beautiful June day. The federal government will take one tiny step back into its constitutional box. Oh yes, Miss future lawyer, I do want fries with that.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com     or    www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

The Prince and the Paupers

As the President was addressing the nation (or the tiny audience that watched) yesterday, I found that my reaction was as predictable as his rhetoric. I do not believe that he is aware that the “all men are created equal” society of the United States has different expectations for our leaders than Kenyans have for their historic royalty. Vague royal pronouncements from the Prince do not allay the concerns and worries of the people. They sense that he is transforming them into paupers. After all, he does take pride in his transformational presidency. When the nation is wallowing in absolute insolvency, he can call another press conference and claim “Mission Accomplished.”

Obama used a term during his address that I found staggering for its effrontery. He claimed that part of his deficit reduction plan would be to save a trillion dollars through spending reductions in the tax code. That little term provides a picture window insight into the real attitudes and ideology of the poseur. The implication of the statement is that all money belongs to the government, and any portion of it that the people are permitted to keep is an expenditure…spending. So, the imperial prince of mendacity has determined that the government should cut spending by raising taxes. He wants more money from taxpayers so that he doesn’t have to curtail the goody packages that he hands to his most loyal supporters.

El Presidente’ delivered a laundry list of pandering programs that he asserted were national priorities. Perhaps they are national priorities in his elitist statist mind, but a thorough examination of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States reveals no evidence of the existence of any of those programs or goals. Not there. Not constitutional. Perhaps they are worthy. Maybe they are good for the country, but they are not constitutionally mandated or allowed. Nearly every president in our short history has overstepped the bounds of the constitutional limitations. In 1794 a group of western farmers objected to higher excise taxes on whiskey (to pay down the national debt) and resisted. President Washington sent the militia to force their compliance with the offensive tax. Congress has not been immune from blatantly violating their constitutional constraints. Every time some bubble headed legislator has an idea, they manage to further infringe on the rights of the people. So, Obama is not unique, but his sheer audacity and casual disregard, perhaps even contempt, of the constitution is breathtaking and ominous.

Given the willingness of both parties of Congress to cavalierly violate the Constitution and the natural rights of the people, we cannot expect them to suddenly acquire a constitutional conscience. Congress is complicit in the lawbreaking frenzy. Congressmen and Congresswomen believe that their intellects and their compassion are superior to ours; therefore they believe they are obligated to protect us from ourselves. Who, pray tell, will protect us from them? So, in the current environment where the President wishes to raise taxes and promise token reductions in federal spending as we speed towards fiscal collapse, the Congress will provide minimal resistance. They will engage in high sounding rhetoric and predictions of woe (truthfully, for once), but in the end they will hop on board the President’s fast track to failure. It is not coincidental that as the needs of the people increase, and the government lurches to supply them, the people’s abilities and capabilities to solve their own problems diminish. Feed the wolf on a regular basis, and he will forget how to hunt. Government programs have coddled us to the point that our survival as individuals and as a nation will be problematic if the system would collapse.

As we circle back to the President’s address and its underlying philosophy, my pessimistic assessment is that on April 13^th, 2011 at approximately 1:45pm EDT, Barrack Hussein Obama delivered a suicide note for the United States of America. Congressman Paul Ryan responded with a statement that was equivalent to insisting that the President postpone the evil deed for a day or two. Under both scenarios we die. One lingers more than the other. Sometimes politicians believe that they are god-like. Apparently they are because they control the life and death of a great nation, and, it seems they choose death.

Comments:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com   or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Smackdown

As a non-essential voter and commentator, I am somewhat perplexed by the joyful noise emanating from the treasured halls of our nation’s capitol surrounding the fact that a federal government “shutdown” was averted. I realize that it couldn’t be described as a “slowdown” because that is standard operating procedure for most government agencies. In addition, “slamdown” wouldn’t work so well because 55% of the government functions and work force is considered “essential.” Oddly, the President arbitrarily decided that the payroll for military personnel was not an essential function of the government. I understand that he is not as bright as advertised and is not a diligent Commander-in-Chief, but couldn’t someone remind him that an “all-volunteer military” does not mean that they fight and die for no pay?

When I was younger, support for my government was synonymous with patriotism. In my view, that is no longer the case. I do not trust my government (sadly, at any level), and I do not believe my government. When 55% of the government continues to operate during a “shutdown,” and military pay is not included as “essential” (Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution identifies defense of the nation as a mandatory function of the federal government), then anything goes. Any Alice through the Looking Glass character would be thrilled by the twists, turns and distortions encompassed in “government speak.” Essential is not vital. Shutdown is a mere allusion to stoppage. Cuts are really smaller increases. Critical family planning programs is new speak for killing babies at taxpayer expense. Supporting a critical unbiased presentation of news is in reality a subsidy for limousine liberals who are too cheap and money hungry to underwrite their own programming preferences. Also, PBS funding allows Bill Moyers, Charlie Rose, Ken Burns and Big Bird to live in a style much nicer than that of lesser beings (you and me).

While the President was backhanding the military and Harry Reid was defending baby killers, John Boehner was holding the keys to the treasury (almost empty treasury). Boehner and his diaper-clad henchmen fought as hard as they could against the evil spenders and bankrupters in government, and they gained a massive concession from the statists. The statists promised to spend $38.5 billion fewer dollars in the next six months than they originally planned….although some of the money was already sitting in appropriated but unspent funds and others had already been dropped from the White House request. The bottom line is that the GOP House leveraged the power of the purse into promises of $12-14 billion dollars in projected cuts, and the annual deficit for this fiscal year will be a mere $1.5 trillion – 1.7 trillion. No wonder the GOP members were so excited and ecstatic. They claim to have changed the “dialogue” on Capitol Hill to now include spending cuts.

No more sarcasm today. Obama wins, the GOP should be embarrassed and the people lose again…Big Time. No significant change in the projected deficit translates into no impact from the Republicans. The money (borrowed money) continues to be spent, the babies’ deaths are underwritten by the taxpayers, and the wine and brie class continues to enjoy its taxpayer-supported high-brow entertainment. Nothing has changed despite the fevered pronouncements that cuts are now on the table. The spending goes on, unconstitutional programs, agencies, bureaus and departments continue to be fully funded so that they can continue to harass and over regulate the people. When a government has become as large as this one is, they can overwhelm the citizens with legislation, regulations and rules. When citizens attempt to restore their rights and liberties, they discover that the battle must be waged on a multiplicity of fronts simultaneously. The task is monumental, and the odds for victory are small. The difficulty is made greater when the holders of the keys to the Treasury claim to support constitutional government but makes NO EFFORT to eliminate unconstitutional elements of the federal monolith.

The citizens, we citizens, are in this fight alone. We must work together in the spirit of Samuel Adams to reject and dismantle the tyrannical government at all levels. Shutting down 45% of the government for a few hours isn’t going to get it done. Don’t look to the Republicans for help. They are not capable. They are also culpable. I nominate Punxatawney Phil to lead the GOP. At least he is honest enough to admit that he’s afraid of his own shadow. The time has come for “we the people” to begin a government smackdown. Are you ready to rumble?

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com    or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Chop Chop

Four days after the fact, I am still trying to get my head around the paltry $38.5 billion in cuts that have been hailed as a victory. It has been long been a principle of mine that whole departments , agencies and bureaus must be eliminated for any serious attempt for fiscal responsibility to be achieved. Thomas Crown is a frequent contributor to www.redstate.com and penned an enlightening piece. I’ve included it below with some edits for brevity’s sake.

http://www.redstate.com/audax/2011/04/10/republic-began-with-four-federal-departments-our-opening-negotiating-position-for-next-budget-cuts/

Our Federal Republic began with just four Federal Departments. Anything else was left to the individual States to worry about. The Four Departments and their Secretaries where:

State, Thomas Jefferson, Secretary
Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, Secretary
War, Henry Knox, Secretary
Post Office, Benjamin Franklin, Post Master General (responsible for Transportation, i,e, Post Roads)

That’s IT! That’s all we need, except for the Post Office! We don’t need that anymore, private enterprise can do it better and cheaper!

So, here is where we can begin budget cutting up to $1.866 Trillion in the next Federal Budget. These numbers from the 2010 Federal Budget.

$78.7 billion (?1.7%) – Department of Health and Human Services. This should go back to the individual States where it belongs. Where is this in the Constitution?

$72.5 billion (+2.8%) – Department of Transportation. This was in the Post Office Department i.e. Post Roads in the First Federal Government but as our Republic has evolved should now be the provenance of the individual States.

$47.5 billion (+18.5%) – Department of Housing and Urban Development. Where is this in the Constitution?

$46.7 billion (+12.8%) – Department of Education. This should go back to the individual States where it belongs. Where is this in the Constitution?

$42.7 billion (+1.2%) – Department of Homeland Security. If there was EVER a waste of funds, this is it! Important parts to the Department of Justice (i.e. The FBI) or Department of Defense.

$26.3 billion (?0.4%) – Department of Energy. Where is this in the Constitution?  Nuclear stuff to department of Defense.

$26.0 billion (+8.8%) – Department of Agriculture. Where is this in the Constitution? If individual States feel they must “help” their farmers, then let them.

$18.7 billion (+5.1%) – National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Where is this in the Constitution?  Let private enterprise explore space if they feel there is a profit motive in it.

$13.8 billion (+48.4%) – Department of Commerce. Where is this in the Constitution? Let State Department handle any “important” areas that need to be covered.

$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of Labor. Where is this in the Constitution?

$12.0 billion (+6.2%) – Department of the Interior. Where is this in the Constitution? SELL OFF Federal lands or give to individual States.

$10.5 billion (+34.6%) – Environmental Protection Agency. Where is this in the Constitution? Let individual States handle how they keep their State clean.

$7.0 billion (+1.4%) – National Science Foundation. Where is this in the Constitution?

$5.1 billion (?3.8%) – Corps of Engineers. Where is this in the Constitution? Transfer back to Military, the Military functions, then let individual States handle anything else.

$5.0 billion (+100%) – National Infrastructure Bank. Where is this in the Constitution?

$1.1 billion (+22.2%) – Corporation for National and Community Service. Where is this in the Constitution?

$0.7 billion (0.0%) – Small Business Administration. Where is this in the Constitution?

$19.8 billion (+3.7%) – Other Agencies. WHAT IS THIS???

$105 billion – Other. WHAT IS THIS???

$571 billion (?15.2%) – Other mandatory programs. Are these in the Constitution? If not, CUT!CUT! CUT! Individual States can decide what is best for the taxpayers of that State.

$453 billion (+6.6%) – Medicare. Where is this in the Constitution? Individual States can decide what is best for the taxpayers of that State.

$290 billion (+12.0%) – Medicaid . Where is this in the Constitution? Individual States can decide what is best for the taxpayers of that State.

Once we turn these programs over to the individual States and get the Federal Government OUT of areas they have no Constitutional business being in, then we can “negotiate” from there.                                     

                                          ---End of Crown material---

The bottom line is if Congress (particularly the GOP) is truly committed to Constitutional government and a fiscally responsible budget, they could do it NOW. We do not need a “glide path” towards insolvency. That merely postpones the collapse. They aren’t serious. We know the Democrats are not serious, and we should know that the GOP isn’t serious either. These are people who want to be Congressmen and women. They are not people who want to unplug a stopped-up toilet. We need people who will roll up their sleeves and tackle the dirty jobs. Apparently they are not in Washington, and the national fiscal sewer is backing up more every hour of every day.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com   or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Face Book:  www.facebook.com/pages/Earl-for-Ohio/