The Economy

I'm not sure I'm ready to tackle something as big as this issue, yet. Too much going on with too many entangled pieces. But here are a few thoughts (oversimplifications, really):

• There is plenty of blame to go around on this one. I find it mildly amusing when the parties point fingers at each other on the economy. At this point I don't know who is worse, the tax-and-spend Democrats or the cut-taxes-and-spend Republicans. Probably the Republicans. At least the Democrats are being true to who they are; you knew what you were getting when you voted for them. The Republicans seem to have lost their sense of direction and identity. They are as close to losing all relevance as the Democrats were a few years ago. Don't worry. If there is one thing I have confidence in it is the political parties' ability to give their opponents back their relevancy by being stupid.
  
• The government supporting Lehman, or at least supporting a buyer, would probably have been a cheaper move in the long run. The credit markets might not have frozen and there would possibly be less need for "stimulus." Remember, the markets froze because banks lost confidence that other banks would be around the next day to repay their overnight loans. If you can't rely on a bank to repay their loans, how can you rely on the average person?
  
• The stimulus bill will not end the economic problems. There is too much pointless spending and not enough stimulus. The lesson we SHOULD have learned from the Great Depression is that you can't spend yourself out of a recession . . . you can't borrow yourself out of debt. So much for new ideas!
  
• Positive economic news has started popping up (January and February numbers). This means that, if the recovery has started (fingers crossed), it started before one cent of "stimulus" money was spent. Is it because the Bush administration did something right? Is it because Obama's election gave people enough hope to get out there and spend? Or is it because these things happen in pretty regular cycles? I think it is likely a combination of the last two. Certainly the Bush Administration can't be credited with too many correct moves.
• If the recovery has started on its own, that makes the stimulus package more worrying, in my opinion. Do you think the politicians are going to forgo their earmarks and pet projects just because the "stimulus" isn't needed anymore?
  
• Worrying about $165 million in bonuses out of the BILLIONS that are being thrown at AIG is a straw man meant to distract you from the other things the government is trying to do . . . or should be doing, but haven't got a clue on how to do it (re: unfreezing credit markets and stimulating the economy). Oh, and the bonuses were not bad things. They were paid out to people who worked to keep the company from collapsing. Read one person's perspective here. They worked hard for that money. Not just during this crisis, but all their lives to get to where they are.
  
• A hint for Congress, punitive taxation is not a good thing. It does not set a good precedent. Oh, and let's talk about those new cars you all just voted for yourselves in the "stimulus" package.
• I think Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" should be required reading for anyone elected to office.

OK, so this ended up being more of a rant than I intended. More thoughtful and well-researched post next time. I promise.

Unless I get mad again.

How Smart Were our Founding Fathers?

I want to get into issues pretty quickly, but I think it is important to give a good background on why I believe the things I believe. I think this will save a lot of time later.

I think that most people's political ideologies are formed over time; first through their parents and then through their experiences (and hopefully through their education, both formal and informal). So, to continue to give you a little background on my political formation and thoughts . . .

Aside from some glaring issues regarding who should be allowed to vote, and to whom freedoms should be ascribed, I think the Founding Fathers were pretty damned smart. Case in point, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Within this one phrase are so many signs of their brilliance.

. . . all [people] are created equal . . .

Think about what this phrase means. It is revolutionary for its time. It means that there is no royalty; there is no divine right of kings; anyone from any level of society can consider themselves as worthy as any other person; there is no reason so swear loyalty to any person. This part of the phrase is what makes the American form of government possible, and different from other Western democracies that still recognize a monarch as head of state (no matter how ceremonial that monarch is).

It also means we have no caste system, so anyone, regardless of race, gender, creed, bank balance, etc., can get ahead in society. Whether you voted for President Obama or not, he proves this to be the case. Well, he proves that we are moving in that direction. I think Secretary Clinton's rise to power (and near-nomination for the Presidency) is also an example of this.

One of the key points here is that we were created equal. This does not mean that this equality can and should be maintained. It means that we all have the same abilities and potential at birth. What we choose to do with these abilities and potential is up to us. This is what allows those who desire to do so to advance in society. This is pretty key to my beliefs. We are all born with potential but it is up to us, not anyone else, to do something with this potential.

. . . Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

This is the part of the sentence that really gets me, and that forms the basis of my political reasoning. Not only are these rights inviolate and not contingent upon the rule of law, but the Founding Fathers, I believe, put them in the correct order, which is something I think we tend to forget these days. The right to life (not in the abortion sense) is the most important, followed by our right to liberty, and finally our right to pursue those things that make us happy.

This was not a new concept, really. As stated by John Locke (not the Lost character), "no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions." And as stated in the Virginia Declaration of Rights, "That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

All of my political beliefs flow from this concept and from the concept, as espoused by John Stuart Mill, that my rights end where your nose begins:

"The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right...The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign"

So, that is the foundation on which I began building my political ideology.

A Little Bit About Me

I guess the best place to start is by giving you a bit of background about who I am, politically.

I have, until recently, considered myself to be a Republican. With the hijacking of the Republican party by the neo-conservative and evangelical movements I find that that label no longer fits. These days I think of myself as more of a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. A paleo-conservative, if you will, in the vein of Teddy Roosevelt. In fact, the more I look into Roosevelt the more similarities I see between our political ideologies.

We'll get into these topics in depth later, but basically I believe that what you do in the privacy of your home is no one's business but yours, as long as your activities do not infringe on other people's rights. I also believe that no one has a right to the money I earn except me. I believe that we have only one environment and whether we are causing global warming or not, if we have the ability and technology to do things in a cleaner fashion we are stupid not to do so. Finally, I believe that the separation of Church and State is one of the greatest ideas anyone has ever had in the history of the world and should be defended at all cost.

So that is an extremely brief synopsis of where I come from. What about you?

Why would I do this?

There was a time, not too long ago, when the United States had a government of, for and by the people. Somewhere along the line that concept got lost. We now have a government of the Party, for the Party and by the Party. Sure, you can say that there are two parties, but the fact is that they both have one similarity that outweighs all differences, the desire to obtain and maintain power by any means necessary. They no longer care about or represent the people; only for themselves.

This blog is being born out of a sense of extreme frustration at what is happening in the United States today. We, the people, have labeled ourselves with some arbitrary party designation and seem to have bought into the idea that Democrats and Republicans are somehow enemies. What we need to realize is that the Parties benefit from this extreme partisanship at our expense. We should not think of things along party lines. How many of us can truly say that they agree with every aspect of what our chosen Party has a part of their party platform? I know I can't.

So, why am I doing this? Well, I want to get more involved in politics, but know that I do not have all the answers or even know all the questions. I'd like to start a sort of Lyceum or debate society where people can come and discuss the issues. I'd like a place where we can throw out what we think the issues are, what we think the solution is, and how we think the solution can best be implemented and then get some feedback. What are your thoughts? How would do things differently? What would you focus on instead of what I am focusing on? Hopefully through these exchanges we can all gain something, whether it is learning something new, a new perspective on a subject, or at least a better understanding about a subject and the reasons people believe what they do.

Maybe at the end of this all I, or maybe one of you, will run for some elected office. Who knows, one of us may even win.

If nothing else, at least we will be involved, and that is the only way to change the system.