Authored by William Robert Barber
We are presently experiencing the result of politicians winning elections on promises made to those who fashioned their election. These of the elected class with a straight face boldly pronounced to labor unions, to those workers who pay no federal taxes, to the unemployable and to the unemployed, to those on welfare, to city, county and state service personnel, to one and all they promised a plethora of recompense and benefits for services rendered or simply because. All that was necessary to guarantee the fulfillment of such was to cast their vote in the proper column.
Well lo and behold today the promises of yesteryear have come to be reconciled. The foolishness of promises made has come home to roost. The counter parties of these government inspired agreements are seeking nothing less than the honoring of contractual terms and conditions. And the government must renege. Or tax more, and more, and then a little more. And these politicians who promised such assurances, well, they or their scions are still promising.
Interestingly, despite the observable fiscal impossibility of sustaining an ever appreciating public debt to fund government spending, the Democratic response is too bandy about the issue as if any further concern is wasteful effort. Rather than reduce the expenditures or truncate the costly process of governing, the elected of the Obama brethren, would rather charge the creators of taxable revenue with “not paying their fair share.” Of course no one on the Democratic side of the isle has produced a budget; no Democrat (including the president) has come forth and declared the exactness of what is a “fair share,” and as the natural prerogative of politicians lacking the sustenance necessary for a meaningful debate demagoguery is their preferred rebuttal to any query or actionable on the subject of presenting a consequential legislative fiscal policy.
The continuum: U.S. government has over the last three years managed to produce deficits excessive of a trillion dollars a year. This debt-enhanced fiscal policy that is allowed to function free of any budgetary restraint (since there is no budget) as long as the interest on the national debt is outrageously diminutive and most importantly, if treasury auctions have many more buyers than sellers.
Remembering that our nation’s trading partners have accepted dollars as payment for products imported and sold into this country. The reason and rational of China buying our national debt is founded on the premise that such is the cost of exporting into the U.S. This purchase of U.S. debt by China will continue and be, futuristically, directly proportional in volume to China’s ability to create and service the needs, wants, and desires of its domestic market. And of course, as long as, the U.S. is by far and away the largest economy in the world and as such the grandest consumer market that has ever existed the purchasing of U.S. debt by China and others will continue unabated.
Nevertheless, the servicing of debt has forced the Federal Reserve to print fiat currency, tons of paper currency, which has been disbursed to States, certain cities, various governmental departments, and to non-discretionary obligations. It is these disbursements; this particular servicing of excessive governmental spending that will oblige Humpty-Dumpty to fall off the wall.
Because Obama was elected in 2008 and the Republicans took the House of Representatives in 2010 stasis is the proper descriptive of congress. Neither side can overwhelm the other, so the cognitive amongst us believe that an election will decide and thus mandate a specific vector, a unifying true course of action. But I fear that because of the negative slings and arrows that will frame this particular election the results of November 2012 will not unify, instead, the odds are in favor of ratcheting up the intensity of peoples’ ideological differing. My sense is neither political party will be prompted by the electoral results to adopt a compromise of their accepted ideological doctrine; nor will the looser submit governess to the winner.
We have layered our institutions with the excessive-burdensomeness of an ambiguously enigmatic process; a governing process that strives to traverses an all inclusive spectrum of wishing to satisfy every constituent. It is as if government was a perpetual motion machine provoked by the inertia of public opinion polls, media disposition, faceless staffers, the appointed, the influential and lots of cash.
The U.S. government has over the last one hundred years moved away from a governing by law and has instead embraced the doctrine of governing by men. This nation as never before selects laws to enforce and laws to turn a blind eye to. We have weighed and measured our fiscal ills, declared our intent to remedy, and immediately start spending more money.
We are a leaderless nation vectored by the contrarian’s of George Washington’s essence, as well as, his advice. Washington did imply that political parties will destroy the Republic…