Category Archives: Political philosophy

WHEN NATIONS GO BANKRUPT

Have you ever wondered what happens when a nation goes bankrupt? There is no bankruptcy court for nations. A country cannot just fade away into non-existence as can a corporation. Merger is not a way out either.

A look at the country of Greece and at the city of Oakland, California will give us a clue. Neither is quite bankrupt but both are on the verge. In Greece riots over reduction in spending have already killed a few people. In Oakland the police chief threatens not to respond to telephone calls in cases of burglary, grand theft, vandalism or auto accidents, and a list of certain other offenses. This is no doubt a threat for political purposes, but it gives us a hint as to what can happen when a government entity truly cannot pay their bills.

Policemen, firemen and teachers, will they continue to work if they are not paid? They will not and chaos is the result. Sporadic riots and looting erupt. Some people die. If the nation is one with a single payer* health plan and can no longer pay its bills, everyone’s health care is in curtailed. Radical change in government becomes acceptable, even sought for by the people.

The change can take a turn to conservative rule such as happened in Chile, or it can be reliance on the grand promises of a despot as happened in Germany. It can revert to prosperity as have Chile and Germany, or continue to meander somewhere between mediocrity and misery such as was the case for the people of the Soviet Union and its satellites. These are the inevitable ends for nations that continue to spend beyond their means, right  into insolvency. Obama is accelerating our descent into this pit. He can be stopped. He must be stopped.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share


*propagandic – for fully government paid and controlled

UPDATE July 16
Philadelphia Mayor calls for closure of firehouses.

STUDENT LOANS OUTLAWED BY OBAMACARE

LIBERTY LOST, ONE BILL AT A TIME

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as Obamacare, includes a provision that eliminates private sector student-loan programs. Preposterous? Nothing is preposterous in Washington.

In a letter to supporters, Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, writes:

[Hillsdale’s resolution to remain independent of government funding] comes at a time when the federal government is increasing its unconstitutional grip on higher education. In the most recent example, sweeping legislation was passed that takes the student-loan business away from private lenders and hands it over to the Department of Education. This measure was tacked onto the health-care bill at the zero hour, and with false and laughable claims of saving billions of taxpayer dollars.

He who controls the purse strings controls absolutely. We are losing our liberty one increment at a time. We are losing it in subtle, almost clandestine ways. Did you know this provision was in the health-care bill? I would venture to say that many, perhaps even most of our representatives who voted for the bill were unaware of it.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

A HOUSE DIVIDED

Democratic state governors are disturbed over Obama’s stance against the states over immigration policy. The governors have expressed concern that it may cost them their re-election. What should really concern them is his intrusion on the sovereignty of the states. What should concern us all is the division Obama is fostering between the States now United.

“And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand”. Matthew, chapter 12 verse 25

We have found it appropriate to publish excerpts from Lincolns famous House Divided speech in our REFERENCE feature.

Looking back over history one might ask, why the new continent developed into a great world power but Continental Europe never did. The answer is clear. Europe remained balkanized while in America the states united. Our strength, indeed our very existence derives from our unity. Barack Obama is assaulting that unity.

What is it that drives this man???

Bob B

RANDOM RECOMMENDATIONS

For something that will warm the cockles of your heart,Random Thots recommends you spend some time with a certain Sagacious Blonde. Click here and then here for uplifting experiences.

For something different in a book,The Crowd, by Gustave Le Bon. Originally published in France in 1895, is such a classic that paperback editions are readily available today. Be forewarned, it was written over 100 years ago at atime when one could say that crowds behave emotionally and illogically, like women. But even a feminist might nod with approval when reading Le Bon’s conclusions gleaned from his study of crowd behavior and how it differs from the way its members would behave individually.

For helping the poor,
Poor Richard’s Almanac   November, 1766
Topic: Poverty
On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor

I am for doing good for the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good for the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.                       Benjamin Franklin

RANDOM EVENTS by Thomas Sowell

Our next guest this week is a man much to be admired, a profound thinker and author of many good books. His Conflict of Visions was the first of Random Thots reviews. Rarely do you find in one person, the modesty, genius and integrity of a Thomas Sowell.

THOMAS SOWELL

Random Events by Thomas Sowell
Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Sometimes unrelated events nevertheless tell a coherent story.

One newspaper story that caught my eye recently was about two high-powered schools in South Korea where Korean girls study 15 hours a day, preparing themselves for tests to get into elite colleges in the United States. Harvard, Yale and Princeton already have 34 students from those schools.

When a copy of the 50th anniversary report on members of the Harvard class of 1958 arrived in the mail recently, I thought back to one of my fellow students in that class who had worn a hole in the sole of his shoe but put a folded piece of newspaper in his shoe to cover the hole, rather than tell his parents.

He realized that they would buy him a new pair of shoes if they knew– and he also realized that they could not afford it.

He went on to become a professor at several well-known medical schools and to have various achievements and honors over the years.

From even further back in time, I received a letter recently from a man who grew up in my old neighborhood back in Harlem. When he and I were in the same junior high school, one day a teacher who saw him eating his brown bag lunch suddenly arranged for him to get a lunch from the school cafeteria without having to pay for it.

It happened so fast that my schoolmate had already taken a bite from the school lunch when he suddenly realized that he had been given charity– and he wouldn’t swallow the food. Instead he went to the toilet and spat it out. By now his brown bag lunch had been thrown out, so he just went hungry that day. He went on to become a very successful psychiatrist.

Like everyone else, I have also been hearing a lot lately about Jeremiah Wright, former pastor of the church that Barack Obama has belonged to for 20 years. Both men, in their different ways, have for decades been promoting the far left vision of victimization and grievances– Wright from his pulpit and Obama in roles ranging from community organizer to the United States Senate, where he has had the farthest left voting record.

Later, when the ultimate political prize– the White House– loomed on the horizon, Obama did a complete makeover, now portraying himself as a healer of divisions. The difference between Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright is that they are addressing different audiences, using different styles adapted to those audiences. It is a difference between upscale demagoguery and ghetto demagoguery, playing the audience for suckers in both cases.

People on the far left like to flatter themselves that they are for the poor and the downtrodden. But what is most likely to lift people out of poverty– telling them that the world has done them wrong or promoting the work ethic of the Korean girls, the dogged determination of my Harvard classmate with the newspaper in his shoe, or the self-reliance of my fellow junior high school student in Harlem who had too much pride to take charity?

When young people go out into the world, what will they have to offer that can gain them the rewards they seek from others and the achievements they need for themselves? Will they have the skills of science, technology or medicine? Or will they have only the resentments that have been whipped up by the likes of Jeremiah Wright or the sense of entitlement from the government that has been Barack Obama’s stock in trade?

In the real world, a sense of grievance or entitlement, as a result of the mistreatment of your ancestors, is not likely to get you very far with people who are too busy dealing with current economic realities to spend much time thinking about their own ancestors, much less other people’s ancestors.

Another seemingly unrelated experience was being in a crowd at a graveside in a Jewish cemetery last week. That crowd included people who were black, white, Asian, Catholic, Jewish and no doubt others. This country has come a long way, just in my lifetime. We don’t need people like either Jeremiah Wright or Barack Obama to take us backward.

The time is long overdue to stop gullibly accepting the left’s vision of itself as idealistic, rather than self-aggrandizing.

Thomas Sowell

ATLAS SHRUGGED, MORE TRUTH THAN FICTION

Today’s guest is Arthur McQuaid, President and Chief Investment Officer, Columbia Wanger Assset Mgmt, LLC. Mr McQuaid discusses Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.

Squirrel Chatter II
Atlas Shrugged

I read a lot as part of my job and I also enjoy reading for pleasure. I typically read non-fiction—largely books on history, economics and politics. I haven’t made time for fiction, until recently, when I read my first fiction in decades, Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.

Written in 1957, the book has a curious history. In 1991, it was ranked a distant second to the Bible as most influential to readers of the Book-of-the-Month Club.2 Its sales have recently been surging, hitting a record of over 500,000 copies sold in 2009.3 What I see as the book’s eerie parallels with recent events have likely caused its resurgence in popularity.

The heroes in Atlas Shrugged are entrepreneurs who create prosperity, and its villains are federal government bureaucrats who regulate and tax. Characters tend to be caricatures; entrepreneurs are cast as handsome capitalists while bureaucrats are cast as ugly, corrupt and dumb. The bureaucrats never let a crisis go to waste and use each crisis to obtain more power and create more regulations. The bureaucrats are economically illiterate, so new regulations further hurt the economy.

Ridiculous laws are passed in Rand’s tale, including the Equalization of Opportunity Bill. The law forbids entrepreneurs from owning more than one business or operating in more than one location, an attempt to spread the wealth around.

Numerous businesses fail, but those with friends in Washington get bailed out. Rand’s bureaucrats provide favors, based on perceived need, to mediocre businessmen who can’t compete. When railroads are about to collapse, bureaucrats freeze payments on their bonds. Friends get their bonds unfrozen (which to me seems kind of like certain General Motors and Chrysler debt holders who recently received preferential treatment). Dissenters are labeled greedy or selfish.

In the book, bureaucrats adopt Directive 10-289, which requires that no one change jobs, all production remain unchanged, all goods and services continue to be sold, and all prices, wages and other income remain constant. Patent rights are to be given to the government “voluntarily” (reminiscent to me of how bailout loans were recently forced on some apparently solvent businesses). The bureaucrats in Atlas Shrugged who wonder whether the Directive is legal figure that it is covered by the many emergency laws.

Eventually entrepreneurs, egged on by the engineer John Galt, get fed up with the bureaucrats and go on strike, causing the economy’s final collapse. In the book, “Going Galt” refers to productive people dropping out rather than serving the “mooching” bureaucrats and their “looting” friends.

It appears to me that Atlas Shrugged may be as much prophecy as fiction. The Cato Institute notes that as of early 2009, there were 1,804 subsidy programs in the federal budget, up nearly 80% since 1985.4 This spending and regulatory environment drives increased lobbying expenditures, regardless of rhetoric to the contrary. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, lobbying spending reached $3.46 billion in 2009, triple the amount spent just 10 years ago.5 It seems to me that money buys friends.

The next luck-inducing principle is to expect good fortune. This is consistent with our investment philosophy. We put money into stocks with the expectation that they will make money over time. We tend to expect continued good fortune from our successful investments and, when it makes sense, let our winners run.  

Arthur McQuaid

Bookmark and Share

Acorn funds

http://www.columbiafunds.com/home.htm

IN TIMES LIKE THESE

Commentary.

“It is a gloomy moment in the history of our country. Not in the lifetime of most men has there been so much grave and deep apprehension; never has the future seemed so incalculable as at this time. The domestic economic situation is in chaos. Our dollar is weak throughout the world. The political cauldron seethes and bubbles with uncertainty. Russia hangs, as usual, like a cloud, dark and silent, upon the horizon. It is a solemn moment. Of our troubles no man has seen the end.”          Harper’s Magazine  1847

Dare we Hope our beloved land will once again triumph over trouble as it did in the wake of Harper’s nineteenth century view? Or is Change changing our path to that once trod by Rome?

“The Budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, assistance to foreign lands should be reduced lest the State become bankrupt. The people should … work and not depend on government for subsistence.”          Marcus Tullius Cicero   106 BC

So you see, some things just don’t change much over time, even a very long time. Madison, Adams, Jefferson and that whole crowd understood as much when they formulated our Constitution.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

SENATOR ROBERT BYRD, R.I.P.


West Virginia has lost an icon. Robert Byrd was one of the most colorful members ever to take the Senate floor. One of his most memorable actions was the time when he stood at the mike on the floor of the Senate for 14 straight hours reading passages from the bible and favorites among his grandmothers cooking recipes.

Those were the days when the rules of the Senate required the continuation of active debate to maintain filibuster status to block voting on legislation to which you were opposed. Freedom to frame those arguments howsoever you choose is basic to our principles of government. Sen. Byrd applied the principle of freedom of speech and made a fool of the rules. You must respect the old curmudgeon for that.

Few people knew it, but until his death, as Secretary Pro-Temp of the U.S. Senate, Sen., Byrd was 4th in line for the Presidency. In practical terms it is little more than an honor as there has never been a tragedy requiring us to need to reach to the 4th on the ascendancy list.

In life we were adversaries, after his death we are not. We are glad his vote has been lost but sad his life has come to an end. We would not have had it this way. His inimitable elegant diatribes shall be missed. May he rest in peace.

Watch and listen to the video and meet a Robert Byrd you never knew to exist.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

Nancy Pelosi fears investigations. I can understand that. The Hill reports that in a fund raising letter,

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is asking supporters for contributions to help prevent the “subpoenas and investigations” that would result from a GOP majority.

After her promise to “drain the swamp” she has reason to fear oversight will show the swamp has turned into a cesspool under her leadership. The Tea Party is Patriotic, not Nationalistic. According to George Orwell, Nationalism is the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than to advance its interests. Patriotism is devotion to a particular way of life which one believes is the best in the world but with no wish to force it upon other people. Patriotism is by its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. Soros and Obama have joined in urging Germany to increase their spending as a means to stimulate economic recovery and support EU nations with greater levels of debt. What they are calling for is what Random Thots calls International Socialism. It would tap the wealth of one nation that has acted responsibly in order to benefit other nations whose irresponsible spending led to the problem in the first place. Soros and Obama are urging a policy that would increase the debt of the EU’s strongest member and support the continuation of the policies that are leading other nations to bankruptcy.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

ARGENTINA

EVA PERON

Juan and Eva Peron of Argentina were as corrupt as corrupt can be. They enriched themselves by boldly taking the people’s money and destroyed a great nation in doing so. A good friend of mine, the daughter of an important diplomat, was close with Eva Peron. At the time, nothing happened in Argentina without Eva’s approval. When a corporation or foreign nation needed government approval they, on occasion, inquired of my friend to know what Eva would like as an advance token of appreciation for her support.

Eva, or Evita (little Eva) as she was affectionately known, was beloved by the countrymen from whom she stole. It was many years ago. I was naive and disinterested in politics at the time, but nevertheless fascinated by the phenomenon that the more she stole the more they loved her. How did she get away with it, year in and year out? My friend explained, Eva takes from the people in ways the people do not understand and returns small portions with a great flourish in ways the people do understand. Simple.

The following is excerpted (and edited) from a post in Power Line today.

A reader wrote,

“In response to the notion that Obama has generated $20B from BP for US taxpayers, I’d like to offer some admittedly sloppy calculations.

First, you said yesterday US citizens own 40% of BP. Looking at my Schwab account right now (I own BP stock myself), I see their market capitalization presently stands at $99B.

If their stock price has fallen by 40%, that means the market cap was around $165B before all this started — the price of the stock has fallen by $66B. 40% of that loss, or around $26 billion was sustained by Americans if we hold 40% of the stock.

So the net cost of this drama to the taxpayers is $6B and counting. And that is assuming the $20B is distributed fairly.”

Power Line’s John Hinderaker added this comment, (emphasis added)

Modern politics consists largely of promoting the interests of those who are aware they are getting money, in opposition to those who don’t realize they are paying it. Here, I am not sure how the 40% was calculated, but it is likely that most of those who have a stake in BP don’t even know it, because it is part of a mutual fund or pension fund. So the administration can take credit for “creating” the $20 billion fund without worrying about which Americans contributed to it.

The concept of steal with complexity and return with simplicity belongs in Alinsky’s list of rules. But it is not there. Alinsky was not interested in self enrichment. He was a true believer, the ultimate ideologue. He lived for the battle, not for the success he thought it would bring.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share