THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER

27 11 2010

Authored by William Robert Barber

Within today’s wide-reaching milieu of political discussion there is a ubiquitous, mostly unfettered circulation of opinions and thoughts. The criteria for the oral dissemination or publication of these opinions and thoughts are not necessarily anchored in truthfulness or untruthfulness. Indeed, in practice it seems, today’s milieu of political dialogue, discussion, and opining requires Machiavellian discretion and arbitrary behavior. Whether the meaningfulness of the discussion is careless or careful matters less; what does matter most to those of opinions and thoughts are the orchestrated, choreographed words and expressions that fit the spokesperson’s intended illusion.

For the professional televised opinionate wardrobe, hair, and makeup are as important to the desired illusion as the content of his or her opinions. The viewer is influenced by the sleight-of-hand as much as the specificity of the wonk’s perspective.

The goal of attaining intended illusion in the current political environment means that a politician, a person representing the government, or an elected member representing a constituency of citizens will not answer the question posed. Instead, he or she can – with a sufficient degree of amoral impunity – misinform, distort, maneuver around the obvious, lie, nuance, utilize legal trickery, be a practitioner of statutorily compliant corruption, and generally dance instead of forthrightly march.

My assumption is that the world of politics and power has an inherent genetic code that inserts into the practitioner’s brain confounding the once ethical to corruptive behavior. Why else would Charlie Rangel, his immediate predecessor, and the many hundreds more of any and every political ideology breach the sensibility of living a moral and honorable life?

Of course overt unlawfulness is a real concern; but what truly scares me is the corruption by means covertly subjective. Like the corruptive influences of accepting government entitlements as a right of citizenship. If California, a state that has institutionalized the righteousness of entitlements, can wallow in the maelstrom of bankruptcy whilst practicing a legislative mysticism that refuses to face realities even as its citizens vote in the very people that put them in the present position of bankruptcy, then left is right and one is two.

Defining the truth will befuddle the well meaning; but it is not truth that I require from my elected representatives. What I do require is truthfulness.

One cannot express truthfulness without transparency; no politician should expect to be trusted by their constituency, in truth they should expect, even demand askance. The practice of citizenship in a free society, a democratic republic, is the highest form of art. Citizenship is serious business.

I would relish experiencing a politician who obligated his office or person to truthfulness, honor, humility, and the sensibility of prudence over the often corruptive manifestations of political party, power for its own sake or personal gain of coin or ego. Naturally, I am not holding my breath over this “experiencing” as a relishable possibility.

Advertisements




THE YIN AND YANG

21 11 2010

Authored by William Robert Barber

Regarding China and all that is Chinese, we in the West, particularly in America, have been inundated with general as well as specific information. Everybody and anybody has developed opinions on the encroaching economic/military might of China. Voluminous documentation of statistics and graphs reinforce from a variety of sources an assortment of disinformation, misinformation, lies, truths, and boundless estimates of possibilities and probabilities. An encroaching China is a topic grandiloquently asserted regularly by politicians, wonks, and the ever-all-knowing media; they, as if psychic (evidence not required), opinionate on every angle of China’s intentions and motivations.

The sum of all this inundation is a growing anxiety that China will surpass the United States in GNP by 2023. The fear that China may at sometime in the future stop purchasing issued US Treasury’s IOU’s, the result for US consumers being an abatement or even a full-stop of discretionary consumption; thereby, invoking an economic reality thus far successfully ignored. Congress and the administration are outwardly upset that China refuses to devalue their currency or allow their it to float according to market inclinations. Hence, the declaration: Chinese goods are artificially lower causing unfair export competition within the global economy.

The pressure, mostly from the United States, for China to appreciate the Yuan is founded on two uppermost suppositions. The first is that Yuan appreciation will eventually stimulate US domestic manufacturing, causing a positive employment growth. The basis of this stimulation of US domestic manufacturing requires a substitution of Chinese products for American made because the home grown products are now price competitive with the Chinese imports. Naturally, the presumption that this event (Yuan value appreciation) will significantly increase employment, is presumptive hypothesis.

The second is that US products, just as they would for the US consumer, be more competitive to the Chinese consumer, thereby stimulating US exports resulting in a more neutral balance of trade or payments equation between the two countries.

Although there certainly are other grievances and concerns related to the China trade but I do believe the focus is now on Yuan appreciation. In fact the focus is so all-purposed If the Chinese did appreciate their currency, then and only then, will the Treasury Department, the unions, and US manufacturing realize that the sky will not fall and indeed the universe would be finally righted into some kind of corporeal balance. However, in the present the government of the United States is sorely distraught over China’s reluctance to submit to this nation’s or even Obama’s persuasion.

My inclination as to Yuan appreciation is quite the contrary to the belief of congress and the administration. Of course my contrariness includes a differing, not simply with congress and the administration, but also, with a whole bunch of very bright, intelligent, and specifically informed economist. Nevertheless, I believe they are resting their analytical sum on a number of erroneous premises.

For instance, China is not a world-class competitor because it does not possess a strong domestic consumer base. In reality the very fact that it imports less and exports more is a negative. When the Chinese import goods to America it either must originate the order by having a US domiciled Chinese owned company initiate, receive, transport, store, distribute, and finally wholesale/retail; or respond to a US company’s order wherein the same number of transactions apply. In everyone of these transactions American enterprise and workers benefit; but, it is more than that, the financial beneficial goes out further to finance, insurance, and hundreds of assorted collateral business entities. The importation of Chinese goods is a multi-billion all-American financial plus.

China is not only NOT a threat to US interest it is an ally. China must strategically position itself in order to receive a geographic dividend from the global marketplace; in other words, China must invest in the global infrastructure as a geo-economic compulsory. Such a strategy of investment-positioning is a surety on two pillar levels. One for China need to invest globally is to insure access to the vagaries of world commodity, currency, real estate, equity, assorted opportunities, and discretionary resources. The other is to stimulate per targeted tactical-investments a continuance of the world’s populous purchasing Chinese goods. Remembering China utilizes USD, Euros, Yen, as well as a multitude of other currencies to make these global investments.

The Chinese are characterized as a nation of hyper puissance; a nation that is growing in every measurable way. But in fact China is no more than the manufacturing sector of every American metropolis. This manufacturing sector has no pollution, it does not churn on the environment, and there is no risk of a technology change eradicating the workforce. China is wholly dependent on US consumer demand; as goes the American consumer so does China. In China’s case particularly we Americans make more money on reselling Chinese goods than the Chinese do selling it to us.

The United States and China, for mutual benefit, are in a symbiotic embrace. The renminbi rate pegs to the US Dollar. This is the truthful Yin and Yang of it.

I do find it intensely hypocritical that the President Obama, Secretary Geithner, an array of other such notables declares that China is not playing fair. How silly and childish these persons are. Is not the object of trade to position oneself to the advantage? Can anyone imagine that the Saudis will cut the price of a barrel of oil in half in the interest of being fair? A trade is measured when the transaction is completed. Whether it is fair or not will depend on if the same buyer, seller, agree to another transaction under the identical terms and conditions. If they do then one could speculate that fair has been established. Within the marketplace of goods, services, and people fair is not a moral equation.

For now, I think that all is well within the partnership of “Chimerica.” Now if we can just get along…





CAN WE AMERICANS SAVE OURSELVES?

15 11 2010

Authored by William Robert Barber

These tax and spend issues that bandy and propagate within political parties’ speeches are today’s most truthful expression of the differing political philosophies. The Democrats – and until just recently the Republicans – believe or have believed that government should be the grand dispenser of the people’s monies. Often, the justification (as a matter of tax-policy) for utilizing government as the harvester and dispenser of the citizens’ money from a Democratic perspective is centered on the Obama-endorsed belief in “fairness.” The Republicans’ excuse (contradictory to proclaimed political philosophy) for their involvement in expanding the size thus power of government has been a series of meaningless explanations. One such novelistic inventive has been some reference to heartfelt conservatism. I don’t know what that means and obviously there was some confusion amongst the Republicans; I think it meant “acting as Liberals” by establishing unfunded entitlements.

Taxing every aspect of American commerce, coupled with the free-wheeling imposition by governments (city, county, and state) of fees and licenses plus the encumbrance of federal individual income taxes has had the effect of stifling private enterprise, abating personal liberty, and challenging American’s traditional definitive understanding of freedom as understood in the Constitution of 1789.

A bi-product of enhanced taxation has been the monopolizing by government of all kinds of enterprise. For example the federal government has imposed by-law the mercantilist distribution of tobacco, alcohol, slot-machines, lottery tickets, a variety drugs, postal services, gasoline, and actually the list could easily fill this page. Conclusion: Enhance taxation has the collateral effect of enabling government incursion into an American’s personal life. Such taxation stands as an unfair competitor to private enterprise, and empowers government coerciveness explicitly as well as implied into the wholeness of American society.

The federalization of this nation’s constitution as expressed by a number of presidential administrations but recently exaggerated by the Obama Democrats unprecedented spending has damaged the check & balance system of American governess. Printing money for the purpose of disbursing such monies to favorites is not only nonproductive it is corruptively endangering the very essence of American sensibility.

Nevertheless, politicians still cling to the concept of more monies going to the federal, state, and city coffers the better. Well, since the Civil War that’s been done by both political parties. The effect being, at a minimum, that government consistently requires more money. In proportion to the government’s need for more is the citizen’s desire for more services, more government pathos for the needy, and certainly more in the form of ‘entitlements’. For the citizen the newly found idea is government dependence; for the government of the elected it is to feed these dependences while enhancing their political position. Indeed, the appetite for more ($$$) is insatiable the symbioses of requirement from one and dependence from the other has actually come down to the buying of elections.

Now if this insatiable need for more cash eliminated poverty, insured world peace, educated the ignorant, eliminated corruptive practice, corrected dysfunctional behavior, rid the communities of crime, fixed all the pot-holes, repaired the city’s infrastructure, etc. etc. then alright let’s raise the marginal tax rate and spend more money. But feeding government has done none of these “good-things.” It has however incurred unintentional liabilities such as the trillions of dollars borrowed from the Social Security Trust fund and the ever looming pension debt for government workers.

Now we are faced with a new majority in the House of Representatives and a Senate with more conservatives. Will we Americans pay the piper; end the nonsense and face the reality of our financial circumstance? Will we act in keeping with the traditional values of Americanism? Will the spirit of individualism face-down the collectives and their idea of American-style socialism? The pot has been put on to the fire soon we will know if it is brought to boil or allowed to cool.





THE MID-TERM ELECTION

5 11 2010

Authored by William Robert Barber

The election was almost all it could be…

Thank goodness for the American people, the constitution, and the very-much-alive practicing ethos of Americanism! This election resulted in the clear revitalization of conservative ideals. The political party closest to conservative values is, as of January 2011, in control of the House of Representatives.

Hosannas! The Obama incumbents were thrown out… Now what?

So far, the Republicans have suggested retrograding spending back to the 2008 budget level. They have insisted on the Bush Tax cuts to stay in place. Repealing or retarding ObamaCare, taking another look at the recently passed legislation on financial services reform, and holding investigative hearings on various Democratic Party actions. Obviously, any actions by the congress to stop, retard, or diminish the legislative enactments of the last two years of liberal progressivism is a good thing. Nevertheless, the culprit extraordinaire is federal government spending. Suggesting that the 2008 federal budget was sufficient of a spending cut is just way too timid a suggestion.

The lead dog in that lineup of federal excesses is entitlements. If the Republicans play politics with this issue, if they talk out of the side of their mouth, if they lie or try to hide the issue in any manner, a dynamic third political party will emerge. I do believe that a majority of Americans wants the federal government, well any government, to operate within their budget.

There is a glossary of descriptive words that embodies the meaningfulness of fiscal conservatism: Good sense, rationality, sensibility, reasonableness, and prudence; these words all apply to governing. If these words are exempted from the application of governing, a general malaise will result. I believe such exemption has been the case of the Obama administration and brethren of progressive ideologues.

It is not that I think the Republicans or Democrats of old have not practiced the exemption of these essential operational descriptive(s). Oh no — but the Obama progressives have purposefully over-filled the cup. Their policy of left-wing excessiveness, coupled with damning the people’s thought on the matter, is the fuel that spiked the recent electoral rout. The legislative action of this congress’ liberal progressives in striving to apply the contrary, the direct antithesis of my glossary of descriptive words, are the act of finality that shattered the glass.

There are some immediate benefits heading in the conservative direction. One of the most outstanding benefits is that certainty is sure to replace vagueness, indecision, and doubt. Withstanding, the political positioning and posturing by both parties, for the 2012 elections every member of congress (because of the recent election results) understands that the American people want the spending significantly reduced and no tax increases. The American people want economic growth – not more entitlements. They want freedom and liberty – not more governmental intrusion into the lives of America’s individuals or its institutions. No more legislative movements to the political or economic left… enough of that nonsense — let’s get real and straighten out this nation’s problems!





THE MOST IMPORTANT OF MID-TERMS

1 11 2010

Authored by William Robert Barber

America, as with any other representative government, governs by the will of the people and in keeping with such is defined as a nation of laws, not of men. The meaning of course being that humankind as proven explicitly vulnerable to amoral, immoral, and often dastardly behavior, man is untrustworthy. Hence the trust is placed in laws, not man.

Nevertheless, to place our trust in laws alone is not enough to guarantee our liberty. We have experienced the words of lawmakers and contrasted their words to their deeds. We have all noted the politician who says one thing to get elected and does another to please a special interest or an undeclared political agenda . We have learned not to naively trust in the motives or actions of political parties, congress, or the media, and certainly we know better than to enjoin willfully in the obedient believing of any governmental entity. The aggregate of all this knowing is a steadfast endorsement of askance and doubt as inherent to voter tangibles. The application of government mechanisms are of consistent concern and forces one, as a matter of due diligence as well as sensibility to verify, document, and contest. Distrustfulness is the fare of constancy between the government and the governed.

Some of the questions that this election will answer are: What does America represent to the world outside of this country’s geographical providence? What is the image of America in the minds of Americans? What is the American ethos and spirit? Alongside a vote for or against the Obama administration and its liberal progressive agenda is also, explicitly, a referendum on the preceding questions.

The many friends and enemies of America are watching for our election results. The world wants to know if this nation is now going to endorse Obama’s social, economic, and politically inspired philosophical agenda or turn decidedly against the ideology of liberal progressivism.

In this particular election, the meaningfulness of America, not just for us Americans, is being judged. Are Americans going to amend the traditional central-right ideology of governess and willfully endorse the Obama administration’s politically inspired leftist progressive governing? Or are Americans going to return America to its traditional sense of self? Are voters moving this nation to a European model or are we blatantly rejecting that model in favor of conservative governess?

This must be the most important mid-term election of the modern era… Soon the results will speak louder and clearer than ever before. The very future of conservative America is at stake!