Non-partisan, Experience Driven, Response to an Article by a Partisan Accusing Partisans of being Partisan

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Ignorance is Curable. Stupid is Forever©

Non-partisan, Experience Driven, Response to an Article by a Partisan Accusing Partisans of being Partisan

Please read

Our response follows:

Paragraph I:

The author suggests that uncertainty is a “bogus” reason for the failure of the economy to rebound.  That means uncertainty must be a “bogus” reason for businesses not to hire, right?  This “bogus” excuse, he says, is used by the right and business.  Does he believe that only those on the right can be business owners OR that left-leaning business owners are hiring at warp speed and the left side of the economy is booming?  Ya see, we analyze the economic reports each month and we can say with confidence he’s wrong, either way.

Paragraph II:

The uncertainty is certainly NOT political.  It is, however, based on another word starting with “p.”  The correct word is “practical.” 

Paragraphs III & IV

We’ll ignore the lunacy of the statement regarding “appropriate regulators” and move on to the really mentally challenged comparison of implementing current legislation to administering tax cuts and Medicare benefit additions.  The implementation of tax cuts is already understood in process and simple in form based on the IRS’ experience with increases, decreases, and even rebates.  Medicare is an existing bureaucracy whose main problem has always been the absolute knowledge of how to add benefits.  Using Dolt-Frankfurter (ok, Dodd-Frank) and healthcare reform as comparisons for implementation is similar to saying a pre-school child should be able to perform diagnostic and repair work on a semi because he’s played with a Tonka truck.  The former Speaker of the House said the four thousand page health reform legislation had to be passed in order to find out what was in it. (video) The Representatives and Senators who voted for it admitted not reading it.  Senator Baucus said (with a chuckle, no less) even if Senators read the bill he could not certify they could understand it! (video)  Dodd-Frank is twenty-seven hundred pages plus in its own right.  A year after passage the regulators, not the right and business, are the most frustrated with it because no one, including the authors, understands it well enough to write the new rules or even have a blueprint for implementation.  There is, certainly, no experiential template.    A year later as the first changes were to take effect it is estimated that eighty to ninety percent of the rules are still unwritten, stretching the responsible agencies beyond their limits.   Many deadlines have been postponed indefinitely in spite of President O’s obvious affection for imposing unmanageable shot clocks.  How long did it take to receive your Bush tax rebates or for Medicare to start paying for your prescriptions once passed? 

Now, do we really need to talk about the absurdity that business owners and people experienced in the investment of real money and the hiring of real people should not have the right to challenge the regulations set forth by pencil pushing bureaucrats who’ve never risked a dime or signed a paycheck and, by the way, were the real authors of the financial crisis to begin with?  << Read why at >>  Does the author really believe that legislation should just be accepted without challenge or question to avoid uncertainty?  Doubtful.  We’re reasonably confident he doesn’t see litigation against things like the Arizona immigration law, Defense of Marriage, Welfare reform, entitlement reform or tort reform fostering unnecessary uncertainty.  Lawsuits to challenge the legislation are the source of uncertainty?  PLEASE! 

Paragraphs V & VI

The differences between the parties ALMOST guarantees a shift in policy?  For the first time in our history a major piece of legislation was passed against the will of those our representatives were elected to represent.  That is policy change we can do without.  I know the arrogance of the party responsible.  They think they know what’s fair and they think they know what’s best.  They have forgotten we don’t care what they think.  They are supposed to respond to what WE think.  They have forgotten that they are our employees, not our rulers. 

Our author demonstrates he completely misses the point.  Anticipation of rising taxes throws a wet blanket on the mood of business and individuals and the expectation they are coming down encourages  investment and increased business activity.  How do we know?  Simple.  We own our own business and are in the business of working with businesses, business owners and leaders every day and have been since the Carter years. There is no longer any uncertainty when it comes to Obama and the current administration.  They are now a known quantity.  They are committed, ideologically and legislatively, to an anti-business, pro-government, pro-wealth redistribution philosophy.  That’s fine.  Many of us knew this before the election and many more have learned it since.  The administration’s problem is that they are in the minority. 

 Americans don’t want a socialist society and we are not confused by the ideological differences between the parties.  It’s just that every once in a while an administration like this one comes along and reminds us that policy is driven by ideology and policy matters.  The people who actually put capital at risk, employ workers and create opportunity are very certain they have no friends in this administration.  The uncertainty resides in the sweeping rule changes already passed but without clear lines within which to operate, the contemplated regulation throughout the agency alphabet soup, and the rhetoric regarding future restrictive and punitive policy.  What we are certain about is the intent of the administration.  The only uncertainty, which is more than enough to keep the economy in neutral, is how bad will it get.  Don’t oppose his re-election?  The prospect of four more years?  Now that is a terrifying uncertainty!

Leave a Reply