“No Man’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session”.

- attributed to NY State Judge Gideon Tucker



Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Obama's Economic Idiocy

I caught a few minutes of Bill O'Reilly's Monday night installment of his recent interview with the freshman Senator from Illinois.

Incredibly, the Democratic candidate literally gave as justification for his explicitly, acknowledged wealth-transfer economic policies, the following, closely paraphrased example,

'If you are doing alright, and the waitress over there is just getting by on minimum wage and tips, why not give a little extra for/to her.'

With incredible irony, Obama branded himself either a socialist, or a Bush compassionate conservative.

It's likely to be the first, of course. What the junior Senator has in mind is to use the tax code, as so many Democratic Presidents, from FDR to Clinton have, to reward poorer Americans for simply being poorer, rather than provide them with incentives to better their lot.

If it were the second, Obama would be advocating, as I do, local charitable activity to identify and help one's own, known fellow citizens.

To me, one of the great mistakes of modern American Federalism has been to attempt to nationalize the originally community-based function of helping the less fortunate. Like almost any Federal activity that is not a bare-bones nation-building or -preserving function, such as military security, an effective justice system, and a fair tax system to fund government, this has become bloated, ill-managed and ineffective ever since FDR and LBJ launched massive spending programs.

Community-based administration of social safety-net programs have always made more sense to me. One-size fits all Washington rules and regulations have hobbled and damaged everything from welfare to education in America.

Unfortunately, the rookie from Illinois understands none of this. He wants to continue ineffective Federal business as usual, taking your money, if you are anywhere near above-average in income, and handing it to a poorer person, rather than think about how to help the poorer Americans use education and our economic opportunities to better their own lives.

No comments: