THE PROGRESSIVE ECONOMIST

18 09 2016

Authored by William Robert Barber

Renowned economists would have us believe that economics is a mysterious vortex of kinetically sensitive financial quantities. Thereby, originating a factoid that only the intellectually blessed of cognitive genius could possibly grasp, an economy’s meaningfulness. Liberal progressive economists sporting PhD credentials by variable means, perpetuate the mystery of economics as innately ambiguous and too abstruse for common comprehension.

In the interest of buttressing their omnipotent façade, while reinforcing the mysteriousness of their wonkiness, they speak in a dialect imitative of English — but purposely designed as nothing more than a series of soliloquies on the merits of generalization.

These economists of PhD credentials are not harbingers: despite their insistence on the viability of economic models built on definitive factualisms, the truth is, they cannot rationalize the dynamics of an irrational marketplace. Nonetheless, they can pretend to foresee the future and profess that the way, the truth, and the light are their providence.

A nation’s economics intrinsically convolutes the economist onto a symbiotic relationship with the politician. These two professions are, often for differing reasons, enjoined: The economist, while striving to inject economic certainty, collaborates with politicians seeking to attain (or retain) their office. This collaborative creates the opening (excessive and illogical regulation) for an economy permeated with marketplace distortions that pervert the otherwise natural flow of buy & sell transactional risk and reward.

It is impossible for individual liberty and freedom to exist in an economy free of chaotic untimeliness. An economy influenced by the enjoinments of politicians and economists is the preparatory culmination of a democratic republic and the beginning of autocratic socialism. Perfect, even near perfect, as with egalitarianism is a useful canard for the progressive economist.

Progressive economists and their bedfellow politicians have created an operational dimension free of constitutional restraints. They function within their manufactured isle protected by ambiguity, “the process,” and an apathetic, “what’s in it for me,” citizenry.

More laws sum into less liberty…

Advertisements




CAN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GOVERN?

12 10 2012

Authored by William Robert Barber

A question of significant concern: Can the American people adhere to the covenants of the 2012 constitution (that being the amended and present judicial interpretive of the 1789 constitution) and govern themselves? The answer is NO, the American people cannot… Well, why not?

Because… At the expense of prudent governing — and to the detriment of self-governing principles — Americans have allowed the central government to create a Byzantine operational process wherein the accepted methodology of congressional bureaucracy is opaque, confounding, and counter-intuitive. Legislation is voted into law on ideological concepts; committees of staff and appointed, not the elected, write and explain legislation to the legislators. The agencies, departments, and congressional committees of our government have literally been overrun by legalese ambiguity. Prompted by the dominance of political parties and to the joy of media outlets, both, the scurrilous and the panegyric bandy about the daily news cycle as though scheduled melodramatic programming. Governing units as a matter of routine persistently produce contrivances of misdirection and outright distortion. Citizens pay more attention to sports, games of chance, and celebrity doings than civic responsibilities.

Because… Governing is so confounding in scope and process that professional wonks disagree on the merits of legislation, rules, and regulations. Obviously, the workings of government are no longer understood by the governed; hence government has evolved into a perpetual motion machine accountable to few. The clear indicator of such a charge is government’s uncontrollable spending.    

Because… Politically inspired econometric analysis… what? Econometric analysis is the application of mathematical and statistical techniques to economic data and problems. I’m suggesting that because such analysis is tainted and besmirched with the supplemental of political gamesmanship and the constancy of ideological inclination, the sum of the collected data is at risk of never achieving definitive accuracy.  The analysis of data is considered, evaluated, and eventually summed with diametrically different results depending on the ideological beliefs of the entity conducting the analysis. In other words, if the basis of founding evidence is distorted by other than the empirical, the deductive, and the utility of logic, then the baby goes out with the dirty water.

Because… Many within the electorate have succumbed to mimicking the ideals of minimalism. They have allowed pretty words and handsome smiles to delete the application of prudence, due diligence, askance of the elected, honesty, and honor. They have traded individual liberty and the meaningfulness of freedom for the naïve, even childlike acceptance that government will render to each and every American a panacea society. A significant percentage of Americans have rejected self-reliance, existentialist principles, and the steadfast adherence to the vital a-priori principle of Americanism: Never subordinate one’s individual freedom, in form or function, to king or government.

We may never regain the means to self-govern; but, if there is interest in such, this election of 2012 would be an excellent measure of public sympathy for one or the other…





THE EROSION OF INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY

9 07 2012

Authored by William Robert Barber

The Constitution of 1789 has since its affirmation been parsed, freely interpreted, redefined, and adjudicated as well as having its thesis, spirit — even its contextual edicts all together! — subordinated to whim of presidential executive order. The original ideal of limited government has been confiscated, individual liberty subjected, the power of governmental taxation judged unlimited, and for businesses the freedom to act severely curtailed by appointed regulators. This nation is evolving from a nation of laws to one of men; the amount of enforcement discretion (of existing laws) is held in the hand of a few.  

Federal agencies and departments ignore, circumvent, and deceive the orders of their congressional supervisors; process has displaced truth telling, attorneys have disabled the simplicity of truthfulness, and President Obama will make any promise, break any promise, manipulate half-truths, lie, falsify, distort, and deceive in order to win reelection.

Instead of adhering to the constitutional mandate of oversight, writing and passing a budget, congress,  particularly over the last century, has ceded much of its original constitutional authority to the executive branch. Indeed, recent history suggests that congress prefers contentious contrarianism and loyalty to political party over constructive legislative action. Federalism,  checks & balance, enumerated, implied, and expressed powers — the initial cornerstone of The Constitution — is subject not to literal interpretation but the whimsical of ideologues and the strength of their power base. Like a soap opera appealing to advertisers and the flighty emotions of a public overwhelmed by events difficult to comprehend, news reporting, more than ever before, is ideologically biased. The ‘free press’ has not only taken ideological sides, similar to a Hollywood production it writes, directs, produces, and presents the news from an entertaining opinion only perspective.

Unequivocally congress, often covertly, sometimes overtly, but always with purposeful intent, has neglected its direct responsibilities. The elected rely on legal opinions, unelected staff, a multitude of appointed attorneys, and lobbyists to write legislation; the elected need not read nor understand the very laws they vote for or against.  The administrative process is more important than what is being administrated. The game of chessman-craft has replaced Washingtonian leadership. Politicians and the gamesmanship of politics supersede good-sense; appointed regulators instead of legislators discern the meaningfulness of laws. Government apparatuses specifically designed to discombobulate transparency, purposefully create a wholly ambiguous bureaucratic process… all the while the size and power of the federal government is enhanced. The idea of statesmanship, public service in the interest of the nation, has been eclipsed by deviously crafty practitioners of politics whose only interest is retaining or attaining office.

Government has enabled an economy founded on the ridiculous premise that borrowing can substitute for organic “buy/sell” transactions; clearly, the circulation of borrowed monies derived from printing fiat currency utilizing the government as the costly intermediary distributor at the cost of rising deficits is absurd.

Government cannot create jobs — its role is much simpler: Do no harm. Nevertheless, congress led by nape-of-the-neck by the office of the presidency (of both parties) has progressively insisted on federal-funded stimuli as an economic policy. Recently, such funding was shrouded under the heading of “shovel-ready infrastructure,” public-employment support for States, and sustaining or favoring a variety of union initiatives; I say balderdash. This economic stimulus has more to do with rewarding political confederates, enabling the election of Democratic or Republican brethren, and playing a tune that placates or pays off their constituents than encouraging fiscal growth.   

What this nation requires (and that will never happen) is a constitution convention; a reestablishing of maxims that reinforce the Founders’ original intent: Limited government. However, in real terms the only true alternative to the chaos of President Obama’s liberal progressivism-socialism-elitism is to capture congress and the presidency. We’ll all see soon enough if the 50% of the voting public who pay no federal taxes, the Hispanics, Americans of African descent, and unionist favor the Obama continuance by voting for their hero…





SEEKING ANOTHER GEORGE WASHINGTON

27 02 2012

Authored by William Robert Barber

There is an instinctive veracity that defines and distinctly identifies a leader. A leader, in the interest of attaining sustainable consensus, utilizes the persuasive qualities of prudence; a leader diligently administers the doctrine of good sense principles; a leader applies an assertive enunciation of deductive analysis; a leader so to articulate the solution, is forthright in discernment.

Where there is no leader(s) to rise above the chaos, to stand, separate, and distinguishable, as in the case of the current congress, followers tend to dilly-tally; they, as if a leave that falls from a branch, oscillate until the stronger wind vectors the descend. Followers devoid of a leader believe in short-cuts. If challenged to pronounce their bearings, they willfully concede to the effectual of the prevailing opinion. They have a tendency to huddle while espousing, with timidity, some populist fancy believing that if they just bandy words about, style and grace will suffice. Well, the contrivances of the leaderless are imaginatively multi-faceted. But for sure without a leader in congress good sense is eroded and displaced by fickleness, the governing process becomes an amoral corruptive normative; eventually, the constancy of legislative compromise deletes the meaningfulness of principles, precedence substitute’s the need for decision making, and bureaucracy impairs innovation.

Today the governing from Washington is renowned for the dilution of individual responsibility. The elected defer their individual responsibilities within the opaque decision-making enigma of governing by committee. The imaginative attorney, the harbinger-economist, and the deflector qualities of a rhetorically enhanced politician all add additional buffers so that an individual politician rarely needs to accept personal responsibility. Maybe history has been so distorted by the victor or pitifully dramatized by the loser, that even the idea of leadership is now nothing but a faint memory. Certainly, many of our politicians, in all levels and sorts have forgotten that the highest priority of public service is to serve the public good. Not to raise capital for the next campaign, create personal wealth-prestige, faithfully serve their political party, and have popular celebrities as friends.

In order to be declared a leader one requires followers; surely, not the most profound of deductions. In the early days, leaders were not difficult to measure. In other words, leaders were in front. The follower’s sensed the up close and personal sighting, hearing, intuitional and intuitive smell of a leader’s prudent tenacity. The leader’s identity was behavior-apparent; courage palpable.

In today’s world a political leader is distanced in the physical being, although technology has its (contrasting to the days of old) enhancements, the apparatus of government and the operating of governing are ambiguous, aloof, and disconcerting. The leader is no longer in front. There is no obligatory to demonstrate independence, sovereignty, and spontaneity. The pseudo-leader(s) of today are required to raise funds so to attain or retain office, look like GQ models, and speak with stylistic elocution.

Nevertheless, in the days of old as with the present, genuine leadership is recognized by one intrinsic absolute: A leader’s judgment must effectuate a positive consequence. This result, this requirement, this one distinctive-discernible-obligatory, this steadfast definitive must-do of a leader is success, achievement, and or victory.

Despite conduct and mannerisms seemingly to the contrary, Americans, traditionally are a result oriented society. Granted, in America, an increasingly heterogeneous nation but with deep and vibrate homogeneous instincts exceptions are a constant. Nevertheless in the majority respectful of nuances and subtleties that are commingled with intermediate causative expressions of anxious withdrawal, Americans will not tolerate failure. Nor will its citizens accept the sophist blend of speciousness and deception. There is no substitute for success. Withstanding the efforts of liberal progressive ideals and the nanny state influences on this country’s laws and culture America is not a: Pathetic, victimized, and aggrieved culture.

The conservative movement needs and requires a stalwart congressional brand of leadership, one that leads from the front. America necessitates a leadership of dynamic vision, leader(s) with the wherewithal to stand confident and sovereign; possessing a willful personality coupled with an inner sense of purposefulness, leadership that persuades others, leadership that establishes a political consensus of common rationale. Leadership that can defeat President Obama…





ARE WE AMERICANS SUBJECTS OF THE GOVERNMENT?

30 10 2011

Authored by William Robert Barber

“Government is the problem,” recalling the quintessential conservative Ronald Regan’s famous line when advocating the righteousness of limited government. But as with President Jefferson, Reagan once elected went on to gainsay his own statement by enlarging and enhancing the power of the federal government. Today however it is not just political leadership crowing the cock-a-doodle-doo of populous sentiments. Today, a plurality of Americans, even those of conservative persuasion, view government as more than just a necessary utility, but a symbiotic dependency effectuating a guarantee for everyday essentials. For these citizens government is the reason, the cause, and the solution.

Subtly spread over a number of generations, the societal ideal that government can resolve the problem has taken firm root in the American psyche. Though this belief is opaque in contextual clarification, short on evidence, and often nebulous in form, the trust in government’s omnipotence has been ubiquitously disseminated and for the most part positively received. In an almost devilish sort of enchantment the idea that government knows best has captured the mind-sets of many citizens. Compellingly, a significant portion of citizens, from wide and varied demographics, to actually openly accept that government is or should be directly responsible for their liveliness.

Proportionate to this belief that government is the end-all solution to one’s life is the emergent cultural degeneration of American societal principles. Values such as self-reliance, work ethic, self-discipline and the acceptance of personal responsibility for ones actions are now, and increasingly so, the exception rather than the norm. The most outstanding results of this degeneration of once distinctly American societal principles are the attitudes, collective victimization complex, and the pervasive amongst the younger persons, a “you owe me” mentality.

The reasoning of such acceptance on or dependency for a government solution for what historically was considered common societal or individual aliments was the contrivance of liberal progressives; progressivism is an affiliate that flies under the flag of socialism. It was the post-WWII babies that grew up in the USA orb of plenty. It was this generation fueled by high-tech inventions that injected the concept of instant satisfaction. Inclusive was the benefit of instant communications seamlessly linked into a media industry that intensified not just the distribution of news but formed (for those too lazy to think) at-the-ready opinions of what is news-worthy, as well as, its meaningfulness. These children of WWII veterans were taught by the brethren of father FDR; they were taught that it was FDR and his progressive agenda that retrieved the nation from the despair of the “great depression,” and defeated the fascist in Germany and Japan. They were taught to believe in government. Interestingly, they were also schooled that Republicans were rich and Democrats worked in the interest of the poor and the middle class.

Their children those born in the 70’s and 80’s were led to believe that America is a nation of wrongdoers, often imperialistic in foreign policy, and that America had a long history of violently acting out its warmongering inclinations.

The latitude and longitude of government authority and its resulting imposition upon the populous has abated individual liberty and freedom; nevertheless, even when acting counter to the words if not the spirit of the constitution, government ignores and disregards lawfulness in favor of its power. The populous seem cheerfully willing to trade individual liberty and freedom for even the pretense of governmental guarantees. Disconnected notions such as blindly trusting government’s competency in lawmaking (considering the lawmakers rarely even read the bills presented) while idly permitting the ballooning of government pension obligations and blindly allowing the creation of an entrenched public service union bureaucracy to run rough shod over prudence, when such behavior is predominate it is likely that government has meandered over the abyss. When courts consider governing under the concept that the constitution is susceptible and wholly pliable to the whims of man or societal discretion, and when the governed believe government is the only true arbitrator of the public good. Our republic has, at that point, been transformed into an autocracy of progressive-elitist; a form of governing that Plato and Marcus Arilleus would consider advisable.

Quantitatively and disturbingly, (for me) government is a cell dividing multiplier. Government is a liberty and freedom eating monster. The idea of an ever expanding all-powerful government is allied with many elected representatives who believe governance is best when its grasps include every aspect of one’s liveliness. They also consider such governmental ingress an eventual constitutional right; i.e. sixteenth amendment.

The resilient once proudly existential traditional American has evolved into an American who increasingly relies on every level of governments as their raison d’être. A significant percentage of Americans are willingly, at least ostensibly, “in the land of the free and home of the brave,” to trade their individual liberty and freedom, for the sake of certain guarantees.

Well, we have federal guarantees for entitlements, social security, even public employee pension funds, including all of the military health, welfare, and retirement promises to pay. How has the government preformed on these guarantees? I wonder how those within the ranks of those who voted for and will continue to vote for liberal progressives feel about those guarantees.

Are we Americans now subjects of the government? Yes, increasingly so. I see and hear news stories wherein the protagonist notes that he or she is a college graduate, then the question: Where are the jobs? As if it is the direct responsibility of the elected or some government agency to secure a job for that college graduate.

I think Reagan had it right…we Americans had better get our act together and retrograde back to our ancestral traditions as such regress applies to a principled life wherein blaming, lamenting, and figuring how to take from the more to give to the less is discarded as un-American. Withstanding the question more government is hardly ever the answer and often enough never the solution.





OBAMA! GOVERNING OR CAMPAIGNING?

23 10 2011

Authored by William Robert Barber

Have we Americans become so disconnected from the plain, simple, and obvious, the logical and deductive, that we can be influenced into believing that President Obama’s $447 billion jobs-stimulus bill is genuinely a presidential effort to promote job growth? Or is it that the Obama administration’s focus is on his reelection and the jobs bill is a tactical ruse, a means to a political end? Is it possible that this president, the superb elocutionist, after the results of his personally guided and endorsed legislative actions are measured; wherein the meaningfulness of such a measurement indicates anemic economic growth and high unemployment… Is this president going to win over the American people with his rhetorical sleight-of-hand? The president’s recent words, policies, and self-touting performances, inclusively mimicked by his progressive ducklings, are undeniably the dealings of a man and office striving for reelection. This looks and sounds like a man who conceitedly believes everything his vice-president and publicist convey.

The opening scene on the Obama campaign for reelection melodrama is a picture of all cheering his carte du jour of scurrilous slander, lies, deceitful exaggerations, and other such banal accusations. He is always choreographed standing with and encircled by the usual suspects that composite the Obama entourage: Public union bosses, their employees, progressive-ideologically inclined benefactors, civil servant bureaucrats, and empathic elected officials of the liberal progressive Democratic persuasion.

The president is professionally staged to be viewed by the populous as a leader wholesomely propagating the righteousness of his cause. He induces a call-to-arms (the repetitive Obama rant) attacking Republicans, specifically by name, to “straighten-up and fly-right,” and pass my jobs bill.

This is the very same ‘job bill’ defeated in the Senate by members of his own party.

Herein is the conundrum for Obama and his liberal progressives: Socialism whether European, Cuban, N. Korean, Venezuelan, or the current American style does not work. Aside from a nation fully committed to a war of survival, a nation therefore, willingly ceding constitutional guarantees for the perceived safety of martial law, the idea that the wise and the expert can accurately central plan the workings of a diverse domestic economy is a fantasy; a Wizard of Oz scenario that has been played out many times to the same failed result. The concept that the taxpayer funding of government largeness will inspire, catalysis, spawn, and electrify a substantial growth of private enterprise is absurd. Indeed funding government such as the Bush stimulus, TARP, or the Obama stimulus, an act ostensibly designed to stimulate the private economy, resulted instead, in supporting unions, sustaining the excessive cost of governing, aided and assisted in the corrupting of original intent, encouraged wastefulness, and enabled the status quo.

Not only is President Obama arrogantly disingenuous when promoting his jobs bill; he is in unison, ignorantly dismissing the palpable: The social and entitlement justice that complements the Obama ideal of how to engineer the American economy is not only impossible to profitably put into practice, the norms required for implementation is directly contrary to the required fiscal, cultural, and statutory environment to maintain a robust American style capitalistic system.

Prompted by the three branches of government, the feds, by means legal and extralegal, are operating beyond and outside of well-defined constitutional limits, the very premeditated concerns of the Founders have come into being, the pillars that established the legal basis of a nation of laws not of men is now, once again, in jeopardy. Liberal progressives manipulate, trounce, envelope, and ignore the meaningfulness of the words and spirit of the U.S. Constitution; regretfully, such contrivances are not limited to the Democratic Party, nevertheless, President Obama and his confederates have exponentially exemplified the discernible meaning of a liberal-progressive social justice conscious entitlement enriching government.

It is time get these buggers out of office…





WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CONCEPT OF LIMITED GOVERNMENT?

2 10 2011

Authored by William Robert Barber

Contrary to popular and media insistence, neither government nor its leadership creates private sector employment. The why-fore of this readily believable stratagem that government can mandate or the sanguinely sage could legislate (private sector employment) is to believe a Navajo rain dance will bring about a deluge.

In the first cause, how in the world did the federal government position itself to suppose that it could create private sector employment? Well, to the detriment of a capitalistic economy, the steady, ever determined encroachment of central government power over what was once the sacrosanct concept of limited government is a great part of the answer. The federal government has taken on as principles of its own the liberal progressive manifesto that government is obligated to take from the mainstream of the self creating and financially sufficient worker bees and give these proceeds to the “needy.” In the process of ceding to those progressive principles government expansiveness has grown gargantuan in scope and substance. Correspondingly, taxes and fees of all descriptive have risen, divided, and multiplied; and so far there is no real end in sight to the federal government’s policy of ever-increasing taxation.

The American government of 1789 unambiguously divided power within its charter; it enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 the endowed authority of the central government. Withstanding, this definitive affirmation (of limited powers) when measured against the day-to-day utilization of federal governing over the last hundred years one must ask, “Does the government of limited and enumerated powers that the framers had envisioned still endure?”

Respectful of constitutional tradition and the cultural heritage of dynamic-individualism, there are those — particularly the fiscal, social, and politically disposed liberal progressive populace — that whole-heartedly believe that the States and the individual cannot be trusted with the right of sovereign respect. Instead it is the central government that is rightfully positioned to encapsulate the disposition of the judicious and trustful arbitrator. Therefore, in the interest of propagating, such fancifulness progressives have created the concept of a living, breathing, and relatively flexible interpretation of the Constitution. Within the context of that interpretive, a constitutional dictum such as the ‘Commerce Clause’ is exampled for expansive interpretation and engineered to fit into what progressives would call the modern era.

The justification for such redrafting of the Framers’ original is also prompted by some great malady, a crisis of stupendous magnitude, or the contrivance thereof. Usually the basis for alternating common practice in form or by statutory means is the discovery of some grave social or fiscal unfairness. The typical unfairness is always populous in style and scant in substance. Nevertheless, the unfairness is one that should have been attended to long ago. As the story goes, the nearly evil, opaquely defined, purposefully intended special interest, probably aligned with the wealthy, are actively working against the common welfare of the community so to enrich themselves or their baneful corporations.

Herein steps Obama the populist armed with promises of “change we can believe in.” Obama defines his political Krieg as between his acolytes, the moral positive, represented as the never politically motivated good-guys always working in the best interest of the common good contested against those of the immoral negative, representing the vilest and base of human instincts. The president has described these counter-to-Obama forces as the greedy and wealthy, oil and financial corporations, Republicans, and certainly, those far right radical Tea Party members.

All the documented evidence that government has some intrinsic sense of or for good judgment, business acumen, or even the sanity of consistent judiciousness points to the contrary. George the III imposed the Mercantile System, Napoleon the Blocus Continental, and of course this country’s trade tariffs, attempts at price controls, and the dogged determination of some presidential administrations and congresses to pervert the natural order of the capitalistic marketplace with protectionist embargos. All of these ‘government inspired schemes failed.

Recently, the Obama administration’s efforts to pick winners within the marketplace cost taxpayers at the very least multi-millions. Excessive taxation, burdensome regulation, and spending taxpayer monies with such blatant disdain is not an economic stimulus it is silly, disregarding of the facts, and seriously detrimental to the economic welfare of this nation.

I do wish I could simply blame the Democrats but the blame extends deep into the Republican ranks as well. I just do not understand this persistent inclination by those in power to always error on the side of big government.