It seems that Reuters has gone way out on a limb and predicted that bailing out everyone and their mother may not be beneficial for the economy. I mean there may be some immediate reaction, but the long term response may not be what we’re looking for.

I find that hard to believe. When President Obama, a man with a lifetime of political service, fiscal policy work, working in the business world, studying business, studying economics, crafting powerful speeches and running for office tells me that giving fiscally reckless companies billions and billions of dollars will help them, he certainly must know what he’s talking about. 

Unless his top priority is advancing agenda and moving us further and further down the road toward a nanny state, where government takes care of everyone. First, Big Brother will just get involved in the companies that are “too big to fail.” (NOTE: President Bush only made Obama’s job easier by getting this whole ball rolling and letting the new administration pin the process on him) Soon enough those companies just can’t get along without government dollars. Up next is health care. Everyone should have a right to government sponsored health-care, right? Jason, why don’t you want people to be able to go to the doctor? So everyone gets government health care (and the best doctors go somewhere else to work for more money and less hassle) and then Uncle Sam is paying for everyone’s health care, all the time. In order to pay for that though, taxes have to go up, first on the wealthiest 5%. Then the next wealthiest 5%. Before you know it, the national tax rate is 61%.

It’s bad policy after bad ideas. Nationalization is a bad idea and it doesn’t work. It didn’t work with AIG who is back for more of the public dole. It didn’t work for Bank of America. Shoot, it didn’t work for all of Britain.

It doesn’t work. Sound the alarm, ring the bells, keep pointing at it. When it goes down, say “I told you so.” Say it loudly, and tell people why.

Finally, I got this in my inbox today. Interesting story. Is it true? Can you really catch wild pigs like this? Whether you do or not, the principle works. You can never undo an entitlement program, no matter how ridiculous it may be.

Catching Wild Pigs 


 A chemistry professor in a large college had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab the Professor noticed one young man (exchange student) who kept rubbing his back, and stretching as if his back hurt. 
 
The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country’s government and install a new communist government. 
 
In the midst of his story he looked at the professor and asked a strange question. He asked, “Do you know how to catch wild pigs?” 
 
The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line. The young man said this was no joke. “You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming. When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. They get used to that and start to eat again.. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in The last side. The pigs, who are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat, you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd. 
 
Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.” 
 
The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening to America. The government keeps pushing us toward socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc…. While we continually lose our freedoms — just a little at a time. 
 
One should always remember: There is no such thing as a free lunch!

 


4 COMMENTS
D Banks
March 3, 2009
ad

The article you’re refrencing is about how the plan IS working but just might not be enough if confidence and new economic growth don’t replace the government support.
” “In every market where the Fed focuses its liquidity facilities,” credit conditions improve. Unfortunately, where there is no direct government support, conditions are grim. ”
Are you really just gambling your readers won’t read the article?
It’s easy to rant about the nice Reagan theory of “we dont want to pay for those who don’t want to work” that we were all brought up on, but thats just not what has been proposed. You can’t really believe that government has no roll in society. Government is the only entity big enough to build the roads, the schools and yes, the medical database.
The Obama agenda specifically proposes eliminating subsidies to oil, agriculture and other wasteful government programs. This is a cute simple analogy, but exactly what “entitlement” programs are you talking about? The bailouts are designed to preserve the financial system, and heve nothing to do with people. If you are assigning the few million in wasteful employee perks, I highly doubt the richest executives of our largest companies are the people you are worried about becoming the free feeding pigs.
The only “handouts” that have even been proposed are the tax cuts and credits in the stimulus package and then the mortgage assistance program which are both REPUBLICAN proposals included as part of the attempt to compromise.

March 3, 2009
ad

You should blog, the entries would be shorter than your comments.

The point of the article is that it’s not building confidence and economic growth, so it won’t be able to replace government support.

I don’t want the government to have no role. I want the government to have the part it’s supposed to have. Infrastructure it can do. Banking? Not part. Insurance? Not part. The Automotive Industry? Not part. Education? Absolutely not part. Another part that the government should have is the military. How much bailout money or Stimulus money went to the military?

The analogy is about a nation or a people developing an entitlement mentality. It’s about the fact that too many people now believe that health care is something that the national government has a responsibility to provide to its people. That’s an entitlement/victim mentality, and it’s growing like a weed, spreading like wild fire.

March 3, 2009
ad

Too big to fail. Now everyone is pointing fingers at Obama that is too funny. He chose the right time to be president b/c he is the fall guy. Meanwhile Bush is sitting on a golf course somewhere and actually has a crew calling him a great president. I don’t get it. Please help me see what you see b/c I just don’t get it… What is your definition of a well run economy???What do you hold ALL presidents accountable for? Tell me. This economy is one big mess and I am sorry the government is left with no choice but to clean it up. Tens and thousands of people are losing their jobs weekly b/c of greedy companies and are left with $0 income, losing their homes, and life savings and the icing on the cake- there are no jobs. No amount of an emergency fund can prepare people for a National Economic Financial Crisis. I am glad I still have my job and my faith, but I am diligently praying for those who don’t. You can count on that…

March 4, 2009
ad

Bush wasn’t a great President, because his fiscal principles weren’t solid. Neither were his father’s. My point has been that we haven’t had a fiscally conservative President since Reagan left office, and that’s why we’re in the mess we’re in. The definition of a well run economy (for me) is one that is fiscally responsible, that doesn’t spend money it doesn’t have doing things it shouldn’t do because those things end up coming back on tax payers.

I don’t believe the government CAN clean it up, especially by dumping trillions of dollars it doesn’t have into a cratering economy. I also don’t think people lose their houses because of greedy companies. I think people get taken advantage of because they’re greedy. They get adjustable rate mortgages to get into a house that’s more expensive than they can afford. That’s not a company’s fault, that’s their fault. It doesn’t mean I don’t care for them, and it doesn’t mean I don’t pray for them. I do, and I do. But it doesn’t mean that we should reward their poor decision making by rewarding it. Now, if someone I knew lost their home, I would help out however I could, including allowing them to live with me while they got on their feet. I think my neighbor is MY responsibility, not governments.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.