United Liberty

I know what you’re thinking: man that Pete is a positive guy. I like to describe myself as realistic, with a bit of fatalism throw in. Either way, I find it hard to look at the economic landscape and have any hope. It is especially dreadful when politicians have to get re-
elected, AND said politicians consult certain “economists”.

Economists have for years looked at what is happening in a society and sought to come up with solutions as to how an economic crisis can be “fixed”. The problem is, like in all fields, you have good economists, and you have the not so good (The latter seem to be the ones that always find their way onto the public payroll).

In extremely broad terms economists can be split into two categories:

If you are a student of American history your eyes should be opening as to which economist is most often chosen by our elected officials. The real question is “why”?

Well, why wouldn’t a politician pick economist #2?

Given the exotic nature of Barack Obama, an Obama victory was logically in question during the 2008 election cycle. In retrospect, however, with the economy then cratering under a Republican administration and a Republican opponent appearing too old and incoherent to be able to confront America’s problems, Barack Obama’s electoral victory makes sense.

More details are emerging on what the Obama Administration intends to do with GM and Chrysler:

In surprising findings to be outlined at the White House on Monday, President Obama has concluded that neither GM nor Chrysler as they now exist deserve more bailouts. But the White House is sparing them for a month or two, and is promising American consumers that the government will stand behind warranties if the automakers fail.

When we substitute influence peddling for the Rule of Law, the value of Washington lobbyists becomes evident. As today’s Wall Street Journal notes, the return on investment is huge:

General Motors Corp. spent $3.3 million on lobbying in the fourth quarter of 2008, a period that coincides with the government committing $13.4 billion to the ailing auto maker under the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program. In all of 2008, GM spent $13.1 million on lobbying, down from $14.3 million in 2007. GM’s reported lobbying expenses for 2008 were only slightly less than combined spending by Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC.

In case you missed it, George Will wrote a great column on December 21, titled “The Final Blow Against Congress” in which he shows how superfluous Congress has become in the age of presidents who prefer to govern without constraint of any sort.

Of course, our Founding Fathers wanted Congress to be the strongest branch of government—that’s why they gave them the “power of the purse” (the right to coin money, raise taxes, and spend money).

Will condemned President Bush for completely snubbing the clear will of Congress in rejecting the “Big 3” auto-manufacturer’s bailout. Not only did President Bush ignore Congress’s authority, but he thought their $14 billion proposal was too skimpy. So he authorized $17 billion from the $700 billion bailout package previously passed by Congress to be spent on the failing US auto industry.

This makes me so mad.  How can someone who claims to fight so fervently against pork barrel projects say he will approve yet another bailout?  Ridiculous.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Republican presidential candidate John McCain said on Friday the struggling U.S. auto industry could not be allowed to fail, and if elected president he would do “whatever I think needs to be done” to save it.

“I would do whatever I think needs to be done to help out the auto industry. We need to keep this industry alive,” said McCain, who is trailing Democratic challenger Barack Obama in the polls ahead of Tuesday’s election.

But not because of the reasons you may believe

Part I - “The False Claims” can be found HERE.

Part II - “Hoover’s Socialism” can be found HERE.