Monday, May 23, 2022

Another Thing Joe Isn't - An Economist

 

Back in November of 2020 I didn’t vote for Joe Biden because of what he was.  I voted against him because of what I thought he wasn’t.  Joe Biden is currently 79 years old and will be within a couple of weeks of being 82 in November of 2024 if he decides to run again.  In 2020 I didn’t think he was a dynamic, energetic, astute man capable of taking on one of the toughest jobs on earth.  In fact, he spent most of his campaign hiding in his basement, not answering questions even from the friendly media that was more than willing to fawn over him.  

Joe is also NOT a uniter.  He has now finally taken his “unity” mask off and revealed to the country exactly who he is.  He is a divider at every opportunity.  In his inaugural speech, unity was a main theme.  Some could argue that it was THE main theme.  That gave me a glimmer of hope that this old political dog could actually learn a couple of new tricks.  First, maybe he was actually telling the truth and, second, maybe he was planning to work with the minority party, which is what this election demanded.  With a 50-50 Senate and a razor thin majority in the House the only “mandate” that could have been suggested is a mandate for cooperation.  But Joe finally and thoroughly snuffed out that hope when, according to his staff, he declared he, “no longer plans to work with Republicans.”  These are not the words of unity but of a repressive, authoritarian and possibly paranoid administration.

And finally, we can now all be certain that our President is not an economist.  I was watching the news late last week when President Biden came on and announced that his plan to solve our inflation problem was to raise taxes on greedy corporations and the ultra-rich billionaires in our country.  I turned to my wife and said, “What the heck does that have to do with solving inflation?”  OK, for those who know me well, I didn’t say “heck”.  

If Milton Friedman had still been alive, I’m sure he would have refuted that thinking, but thankfully, this statement was so ridiculous that even the left-wing owner of the Washington Post, Jeff Bezos, had to reject it.  Bezos said, and I quote, “maybe they (the Whitehouse, the Dems, whatever) need to form a new non sequitur board instead.”  BTW – non sequitur refers to a statement that does not logically follow from or is not clearly related to anything previous said.  In other words, an illogical statement.  Bezos continued by saying, “Raising corporate taxes is fine to discuss.  Taming inflation is critical to discuss.  Mushing them together is just misdirection.” 

In this case, I have to agree with Bezos.  Taxing the rich is a pathetic appeal to low-income people in America in an effort to buy their votes.  It suggests that somehow our government will take that money from the ultra-rich and give it to them.  That, of course, will never happen.  But even if it did, it would not have any impact on inflation. That move does not decrease the money supply and if anything, it reduces the productivity of the country by encouraging people not to go back to work.  Increasing the taxes on corporations could also lead to an increase in unemployment as those companies adjust to protect their profitability.  

Joe can say the craziest things, so we as citizens of this country have to think hard about what he is saying and the implications that his policies will have on our lives.  And there is at least one more thing the Joe isn’t.  He just told us that he is not “a mind reader” in answer to what he could have done about the baby formula shortage we are currently experiencing in the country today.  The Abbott production facility at the center of this scarcity was closed in January.  Joe received at least one letter from Congresswoman Elise Stefanik in February warning about the shortage that was about to happen.  Maybe Joe needs to be a lip-reader, or turn up his hearing aid or just read his damn mail.  If he had, we might not even have had to suffer through this chaotic shortage caused by government incompetence.

What America needs is a President who IS a number of things.  He should be a uniting influence in The United States of America.  He or she needs to recognize the kindness, generosity and strength of the vast majority of American people instead of constantly magnifying the tiny thimble full of deplorables that exist here and throughout the world.  That person needs to listen to and work with the minority party which represents half of the country as the 2020 elections suggest.  He needs to be a great communicator to clearly speak to the American people and reassure them that the country is heading in the right direction.  Our President also needs to be wise, and support policies that will move us forward. Embrace an “all of the above” energy policy to bring down the price of gas today and invest in renewables for the future.  Secure our southern border, so that we can even begin thinking about what to do with the people who are already here in our country illegally.  Our President should project a positive vision for the country and the policies that will deliver it instead of an angry old man who is trying to blame everyone else for our problems.  President Biden quoted Harry Truman early is his Presidency when he said, “the buck stops here”.  It’s time he started to deliver on that promise.  

5 comments:

  1. If you cared about unity, you wouldn't have voted for Trump. So that criticism falls flat. What's more, if you list the Greatest Presidents after Washington, very few put "unity" as their goal. Nor should it be. It's an undefined term which means anything or nothing.

    Your news sources lead you astray if you think Biden just magnifies the "tiny thimble." Though that's all news, because good news doesn't sell. Drama sells, anger sells. You consume it in copious amounts so you think that's all there is.

    The minority party, the GOP, doesn't want to work with anyone. They've announced that over and over and over. They're actually quite clear on it. So that criticism makes little sense.

    Basically, you're wishing for a world that isn't, and you helped create that world by being a committed party person. You reward with your vote and make excuses for those who do the opposite of what you claim to want. Which calls into question whether you mean it. This post indicates you don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obviously I disagree. Virtually all Presidents cared about and strived for unity, and for the Great it was central - Washington, Lincoln, FDR, Kennedy and Biden (just kidding with Biden).

      And you have to stop saying that if I or anyone else voted for Trump they can never have an opinion ever again. That's just lazy debating. And you have to remember what I always tell you. You have to consider who Trump was running against - Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, and they are way worse than Trump. So do I get to ignore them forever. That's how we get into the angry, not listening situation.

      Don't forget that the Dems officially called themselves The Resistance to Trump, so you can't criticize the GOP without recognizing their guilt in that area.

      Finally, in your last paragraph, I think you are talking about yourself - making excuses for those who agree with you.

      Delete
  2. It will be interesting to see about unity after yesterday. HR 8, the background check bill, has been sitting in the Senate for over a year now. It passed the House with 8 GOPers supporting and one Dem opposing.

    Even for me, a 2nd Amendment fan, background checks is not a problem. Polls even of gun owners show it to be broadly popular.

    What holds it up is a Senate GOP captured by the NRA, a nonprofit so corrupt even Fox News has featured it on its Swamp Watch program and Ollie North resigned from its board due to the financial shenanigans. But even in its current slightly weakened state it's a wealthy nonprofit with a large lobbying arm. So wealthy in fact that Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and Greg Abbott all plan to speak at its national conference in Houston next week.

    Here's a chance for unity on something broadly popular. Will the Senate GOP support the President on something so broadly popular? Whose fault will it be if they don't?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As we discussed yesterday, I'll need to know more about this legislation before I support and oppose. How will it work? How cumbersome will it be for law abiding gun owners? Will it even have a chance to address school shootings and gun violence in our country? I don't know. If you want to investigate, I will be glad to publish it.

      Delete
    2. I cited to the bill. It's there for all to read.

      Delete