Many Have Not Thought It Through.

If government displaces business, partially ot totally, where will your salary come from? Or will we all be on welfare?

 

 

 

Theft By Government

      by Nancy Morgan | February 23rd, 2009

 

In the US, the common enemy chosen to deflect blame and attention from failed policies and economic collapse is capitalism.

 

Question: How does con man Bernie Madoff differ from the state of California?

Answer: Bernie's victims surrendered their life savings voluntarily. In California, the victims' money was taken under threat of force by the IRS.

As pundits, politicians and the media focus America's wrath on Bernie Madoff for conning willing dupes out of over $50 million bucks, the same scam carried out by elected government officials in both Kansas and California goes virtually unnoticed.

California, home to 37 million people and a $1.8 trillion economy, recently informed taxpayers that the state will be unable to issue taxpayers their tax refunds. An IOU will take its place. Translation: Anyone who overpaid their 2008 taxes will not receive their money back from the state until, well, until the state figures out how to find more of other people's money to redistribute. Hey, isn't that what Madoff is accused of?

Likewise, the taxpayers of Kansas are plumb out of luck, as political battles are forcing the state to withhold the refunding of taxpayers' money. "We are out of cash, in essence," state budget director Duane Goossen said last week.

If an individual fails to return investor's cash, it's called fraud. If a private business defaults on its obligations, it is forced into bankruptcy. If a government entity runs out of cash, it's called business as usual.

Business as usual also requires quick action to find and/or manufacture a scapegoat to deflect blame and focus attention away from the problem.

Third world countries, decadent dictators and savvy politicians have long known that a common enemy is a powerful and unifying tool, especially when it comes to providing a scapegoat for their own failed policies. As long as Iran, Korea, Cuba, etc. are able to focus the blame for their failure on a common enemy, say the rich, decadent United States, they themselves remain immune from both the blame and the consequences of their failed policies.

So it is with the the United States. In our case, the common enemy chosen to deflect blame and attention from failed policies and economic collapse is capitalism. "It's capitalism that's to blame," politicians claim. "It's unfettered free markets," the media echo. "And, by the way, we'll fix it for you," the Obama administration promises, as they rush to make an example of Bernie Madoff.

In the supreme irony, capitalism is the very engine of wealth that allowed state and federal government to spend virtually unlimited amounts of our money on whatever pet projects they deemed necessary or politically profitable. Now that the money has been spent and the coffers are bare, capitalism has been chosen as the "common enemy" and assigned the blame that rightfully belongs to profligate politicians and reality-challenged bureaucrats. (And to be fair, the Americans who trusted them.)

As millions of Americans, myself included, are being forced to economize, cut back and re-adjust priorities and expectations, our elected officials remain immune. In California, despite a $42 billion deficit, the legislature continues to impose costly regulations and mandates.

The federal government continues to approve trillions of our dollars to "invest" and "stimulate" (code words for welfare and taxes), while continuing to pass legislation that enables key Democratic allies to gain power and impose higher costs of doing business on all Americans. But hey, the unions are ecstatic, the trial lawyers are happy and the environmentalists are placated.

It's "we the people" who pay the tab for government. It's capitalism and the free market system that enables us to do so. Yet, so far, Americans seem willing to let government kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

By demonizing and undermining capitalism in favor of the totally discredited, tried and failed system of socialism, Americans are being forced to buy into yet another unrealistic version of utopia that common sense and history tells us will fail, big time. And, once again, we will be left to pay the very real costs of the decisions being made daily by our elected officials.

Just as Ronald Reagan looked at the Soviet Union and plainly saw that their system could not support itself and was bound to collapse, so too, do I look at the new path America is on. I wonder how so many Americans have been fooled into not challenging, and actually made complicit, in the assisted suicide of capitalism. And of our great country.

 

Nancy Morgan is a conservative columnist and editor living in South Carolina.
NancyVideo@aol.com
Visit their website at: http://www.RightBias.com

 

Josie06 Josie06
56-60, F
13 Responses Mar 8, 2009

So a painter needs 18" between the rungs, while a hardware store needs 14". Or how about: "1926.1053(b)(2) - Ladders shall be maintained free of oil, grease, and other slipping hazards." Individuals would never in a million years have figured this out.<br />
<br />
Now we need an Federal Ergonomics Czar. Bigger government. More intrusion into peoples lives. This is probably more important that, say fighting drugs or catching criminals.<br />
<br />
What ever happened to individual responsibility? <br />
<br />
It's gone. The Federal government can do it all. The "Nanny State" is really truly here. Individuals don't need to figure any thing out for themselves ... government needs to tell them and to provide for them.<br />
<br />
Hummmm? Sounds like cradle to the grave care. Sounds like no more worries cause government will be and do everything. Hope they remember to send my check every month.

I am a big proponent of the science of ergonomics (sp?). If a business needs a human worker, and that worker needs to repeat the same movement over and over in the course of a task, then, yes, if the business owner does not take the injury risk into consideration, then the people's goverment will assure that the owner does. No biggie! It should be a no brainer. What's the deal about using the best tools designed for the job? So yes, regulate them there ladder rungs!

Is strict government regulation essential when OHSA has different space, number of inches, between the rungs of a ladder based on the type business.<br />
<br />
Regulations are need ... sound ones. Government is the enemy when it invades everyday life and regulates everything instead of the things it should.<br />
<br />
To prevent fraud and criminal acts it is good. Our government has gone beyond that and is an intrusion in numerous ways.

Well, there you have it! Strict goverment regulations and oversight, apparently, are essential! When they are removed, watered down, or not used, destruction awaits. Goverment is not the enemy, as long as it is used as a tool of the people!

The crisis we are currently in:<br />
<br />
1999: The Financial Services Modernization Act repealed Glass-Steagall, a law that had separated the commercial-banking industry from Wall Street, and the two industries, plus insurance, came together again. Banks became bigger, clumsier, and hard to manage. Apparently, risk-management became all but impossible, even as banks had greater access to larger pools of capital. [Under Clinton, change in regulation]<br />
<br />
2000: The Commodities Futures Modernization Act defined financial commodities such as "interest rates, currency prices, and stock indexes" as "excluded commodities." They could trade off the futures exchanges, with minimal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission, nor the Federal Reserve, nor any state insurance regulators had the ability to supervise or regulate the writing of credit-default swaps by hedge funds, investment banks or insurance companies. [Under Clinton, change in regulation]<br />
<br />
2001-'03: Alan Greenspan's Fed dropped federal-fund rates to 1%. Lulled into a false belief that inflation was not a problem, the Fed then kept rates at 1% for more than a year. This set off an inflationary spiral in housing, and a desperate hunt for yield by fixed-income managers. [Under Bush, change in policy]<br />
<br />
2003-'07: The Federal Reserve failed to use its supervisory and regulatory authority over banks, mortgage underwriters and other lenders, who abandoned such standards as employment history, income, down payments, credit rating, assets, property loan-to-value ratio and debt-servicing ability. The borrower's ability to repay these mortgages was replaced with the lender's ability to securitize and repackage them. [Under Bush, change in policy]<br />
<br />
2004: The SEC waived its leverage rules. Previously, broker/dealer net-capital rules limited firms to a maximum debt-to-net-capital ratio of 12 to 1. This 2004 exemption allowed them to exceed this leverage rule. Only five firms -- Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Morgan Stanley -- were granted this exemption; they promptly levered up 20, 30 and even 40 to 1. [Under Bush, change in policy]<br />
<br />
Regulation changes means the authority to do something was removed totally. Policy changes means the regulations are still intact and just not being enforced.<br />
<br />
It was the SEC and Congress who are charged to oversee Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the money “management” firms such as Bernie Madoff … why didn’t they? Moreover, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - which are overseen by the government and have special Congressionally granted tax benefits - were left to grow unchecked over the years, in part promoting the subprime housing boom and bust.<br />
<br />
Blame is spread over the last decade and two Administrations. Although, i am not sure that playing the blame game benefits anyone except politicians seeking to score points.

LilAnnie, that didn't start and stop with George W. Bush. That reception room has been going on for decades.<br />
<br />
Enforcing certain powers and not others. Lets not scapegoat one Administration for something all have done.

Well, as far as fixing the immediate mess. Oh boy! Pass the aspirin.<br />
<br />
No one wants the banks to fail but I guess we're suppose to find out this week which ones can be saved and which are a lost cause. Scary, scary times we are living in. Cuomo in New York had a bank of America employee willing to testify to who got how much bonus money there and at Merril Lynch just before they went belly up and bank of america swallowed them and accepted the billions in federal bail out money. Bank of America says they will sue the employee if he speaks up. See? Where is the fairness? The Goverment needs much sharper teeth to break these sons of B's. Democrates have only been in power for what? Not even eight weeks. They're juggling monkeys right now. But they're on it. They're on it. <br />
<br />
The alphabet agencies had been turned into the reception area for the very industries they were designed to regulate. The door swung both ways all day, every day. There was no watch dog environment at all during the Bush years. Scandalous.

No no, LilAnnie. i am talking about this bailout as the enemy was described as capitalism.<br />
<br />
This Administration is not regulating anything with the bailouts or the budget just passed. It is doling out money and creating new requirements on citizens from where there were none before.<br />
<br />
If bank regulators had teeth we would see the results of the money already provided in the bailout. We have not.<br />
<br />
US banks are refusing to say where the money went (www.moneymorning.com/2009/01/06/us-banks-federal-bailout/)<br />
<br />
The Treasury Department has been using the money to buy stock in U.S. banks. (www.capitolhillblue.com/node/13656)<br />
<br />
Wher in either of the bailouts or the budget id it give "teeth" to any regulatory agency? Where in the two bailout bills did it give "teeth" or oversight authority to any government Agency?<br />
<br />
It didn't! It gave the US Treasury the job of giving away the money and Congress said it would come back later for enforcement and regulatory permissions.<br />
<br />
It's a heavy hand ... to reward friends and hurt others. It is a chance to do what has not been granted in this country for decades. Having nothing to do with a bailout or a true budget of operating expenses.<br />
<br />
The Alphabet Agencies do have many powers ... that they do not use. Giving them more is not always the best option ... unless you want to lose more of your freedom and you want business to pay more to operate and cut employees and research to cover the new costs.

No no. The goverment is the regulator. You know? Like warning signs on cigarette packs. And food inspectors. And bank regulators. And alphabet agencies like the EPA and the FDA and the SEC actually having some teeth and doing their jobs for change!

An excessive government thumb on the scales will rebalance nothing!

No one anywhere in the theatre of modern american politcal thought is advocating for communism. Have you seen this? No. Because the idea is dead. Communism does not work. Free enterprise is a good thing. It works well for many. But not unfettered, every man watch out for himself, law of the jungle, free for all, let the buyer be damned, markets. They only work well for the winners. And those get to be fewer and fewer.<br />
<br />
Its so funny. Many social conservatives dispute evolution but proclaim that free markets are good because the strong survive and the weak die, thus insuring a healthy economy. Well, it didn't work out that way. We need a government to regulate markets, to keep law and order amongst thieves. No one is talking about goverment taking over property or the forces of production. No one. I'm talking about a little economic moderation. A rebalancing of scales. You know? A goverment counterweight. As a witness to keep the man from putting his thumb on the scale.

i am sure you both will be happy when your first of a lifetime of government free checks begin arriving.<br />
<br />
Guess we can close all business and just let the government printing press run with wild abandon! The government is the only one left to trust in your view.<br />
<br />
<br />
Excuse me while i go vomit on your lack of understanding.

Acck! Conservatives deflect the guilt that their philosophy of the supremacy of free markets has failed us miserably by blaming government as well. Black pots, black kettles again. Unregulated financial industries have cracked the foundation of the entire global economy. So the states have much less revenue because of this terrible recession and can't pay the tax refunds. That is not fraud! That is system wide poverty! Get use to it. The whole system has been robbed by greedy, take the money and run, free marketeers!