Wednesday, February 25, 2009

On the Emperor's Magnificent New Clothes

I haven't been blogging much recently. There are perhaps several reasons for this, but I attribute it mainly to the fact that Obama's actions thus far seem utterly divorced from any recognizable objectives. During the election, all the candidates were working toward the same goals: win the nomination; win the general election. Every development could be assessed according to whether it would help or hurt a candidate in reaching those goals. In sporting terms, the process was akin to watching a group of Olympic swimmers competing in a freestyle event.

Now that Obama is president, it seems he's the only one in the pool. And instead of swimming from one end of the pool to the other, he is darting about in random directions, with no apparent purpose other than to keep moving. Of course, that's only my impression. In fact, there is probably some point to the exercise; it's just not apparent to me. Nevertheless, it quickly becomes a boring thing to watch and I find my attention drawn elsewhere.

In real-life terms, the country is mired in a deep rescession that threatens to become a depression. The expected response to such a crisis would be a combination of measures to stimulate growth and productivity while providing some relief for those hardest hit. Obama's approach, however, is primarily to create massive amounts of government debt through spending that will do virtually nothing to stimulate the economy in the short term. Clearly, some people will benefit from the so-called "stimulus" package and Obama's other spending measures -- ACORN comes to mind -- but it is difficult to see how his programs will improve the economy as a whole. In order to put money into the economy, the government first has to take the money out of the economy, either by borrowing private capital or through higher taxes. Of course, if the feds can quickly use the money to place orders for some new government cars, for example, the effect will be to "create" some jobs. However, this will not permanently increase the level of demand for new cars. In fact, it may hurt future demand, as taxpayers will eventually be forced to foot the bill for the new government vehicles. As in the swimming analogy, I fail to see the point of the exercise.

The dubious premise of the "stimulus" package and, it seems, the entire theme of Obama's speech before Congress last night was that, if allowed to do what it wants, the federal government can solve any and all of the problems facing Americans in this economy. From what I heard of the speech, it was a rehash of his campaign promises: "We will give you health care. We will give you a college education. We will help you pay your mortgage. We will create a job for you. And it won't cost you a thing." This is, of course, utter nonsense. Beyond that, it is not what Americans need to hear. The truth is, we need less government control over the economy if the economy is to really improve. We need to restore the notion that wealth comes, not from the government, but from hard work, investment, and innovation. I didn't expect Barack Obama to be Ronald Reagan, but does he have to be Evita Peron?

The notion that the government can fix what's wrong with America through various sorts of handouts and bailouts is a pipe dream. What is worse, it is absolutely terrifying to the entrepreneurs, investors, and business leaders (a/k/a "the rich") who would like to go trying to expand the economy but whom Obama evidently perceives as human pinatas. It is no coincidence that stock prices have plummeted since Obama took office.

The one bit of solace to take from the events of the last month is in the realization that not everyone is falling for Obama's snake oil pitch. There are rumblings, here and there, among average Americans who see where this is heading and don't want to go along for the ride. Unfortunately, it will take a lot more than distant rumblings to divert the Obama juggernaut off its present course. The conservative opposition both in Congress and in the media are still in quasi-honeymoon mode, evidently choosing to hold their fire until such time as forthright criticism of Obama at least surpasses incest on the scale of socially acceptable conduct. Hopefully, it won't be such a long wait.

1 comment:

Suryo Indrojoyo said...

Mr Conrad, this comment isn't about the blog post but about your statement on PPP blog. You said "I've never understood why a person's (admittedly misguided) belief that Obama wasn't born in the USA justifies dismissal of their beliefs on political, social, economic issues generally."

Here's a question which might help you understand the derision. Would you respect someone's belief on politic or social matters if he/she believe that the government is somehow involved with 9/11 tragedy?

The answer to that question is the reason why people who believe Obama was born outside US are viewed with contempt and derision. So if you dislike the derision then you need to rebuke instead of downplayed their belief.