Channeling Nero

One of the great myths of Roman times is the one that claims Nero fiddled while Rome was burning. The Great Fire of Rome occurred in 64 A.D., the tenth year of Nero’s reign, and many historians believe that Nero started the conflagration because he wanted more land for a new palace. Nero ascended to the throne when he was seventeen, and in many respects was a hedonistic tyrant who took great pleasure in torturing Christians for sport. It seems to me that, in many respects, our career politicians in the United States are channeling Nero. They have adopted many of his imperial attitudes while claiming to represent the people.

Nero’s insatiable appetite for constructing grand buildings as monuments to his greatness can be seen as a parallel to our present day imperial politicians. Every state capitol and our nation’s capitol seem to be swarming with cranes, concrete trucks and other evidences of the building trades. These new edifices are often named for recent stars on the political stage that become immortalized even when their careers may not warrant acclaim. The building frenzy represents more than merely recognizing colleagues. It is an unmistakable symbol of the growing power and influence of the government. Just like Nero our political elites erect buildings to house the too-powerful bureaucracy and to memorialize their over-rated lives.

The hostility that our governments at all levels often exhibit against the Christian faith can be considered a mild version of Nero’s barbarism. The legislative bodies and the courts are particularly aggressive in their attempts to limit overt Christian expression from the public square. While they couch their pronouncements in language that speaks of neutrality and openness, the actual implementation of the ordinances, laws and rulings overwhelmingly deny Christian speech the same levels of tolerance as those enjoyed by other faiths. There appears to be an “overcompensation” attitude at work among the political class. Certainly, Christianity was a favored practice of faith in the early years of the republic and enjoyed a prominent role in public discourse. Even if religious preferences have changed in the United States, those who claim Christianity as their beacon of hope and faith continue to represent the majority of citizens. Dismissing them and their professions of faith from the public square is morally, constitutionally and politically wrong and unwise.

Nero was the last Emperor of his era. His suicide at age 31 in 68 A.D. foretold the coming collapse of the Roman Empire by illustrating the decay that had consumed the leaders of the Republic. Nero’s obsession with debauchery in some way reflects the expectations of our present class of political leadership. They enjoy better than average incomes, numerous beneficial perquisites, preferred treatment from the public and few demands for responsible behavior. Many of our political or bureaucratic leaders fail to fully pay their taxes or comply with other laws … laws that if a normal citizen were to violate them would result in hefty fines or perhaps prison. The notion of an imperial government has drifted down the centuries from fallen Rome to a staggering America.    

All governments if left unchecked drift into tyranny. They cannot resist the temptation to control the citizens’ lives and limit their options. Nero advanced his tyrannical schemes through terror whereas the United States’ government has implemented its tyrannical agenda through kindness or compassion. By convincing the electorate that massive regulation and control is “for our own good,” the government has massively increased its power and severely limited our liberty. Even now, when the oppressive nature of Big Government has become readily apparent, many citizens embrace the development because they seek “security” from either terrorists or the marketplace. For some inexplicable reason they are willing to place their trust and their lives in the hands of a government that has demonstrated time and again that it is incompetent and unreliable.

As we wrote above, many historians believe Nero started the Great Fire of Rome in 64 A.D., and the mythology accuses him of fiddling as the city turned to cinders. Today, our politicians are fiddling around by proposing solutions that don’t solve anything such as cutting $3-4 trillion in spending over the next ten years while adding from $10 trillion to $15 trillion to the debt during that same time period. If $14.5 trillion in debt represents a critical mass, why wouldn’t $25 trillion be more devastating to our national fiscal health? They are fiddling as the nation burns, and to extend the metaphor further, their irresponsibility is what has caused the problem in the beginning. Our illustrious career politicians have ignited the flames and are diddling and fiddling as we burn. When the Spaniards attacked Rome, Nero killed himself at the tender age of 31, but our self-serving political leaders have chosen to kill our nation instead. Despite his many flaws and warped character, Nero’s solution was the more honorable one.

Comment:   cearlwriting@hotmail.com      or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Dear Congress

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Majority Leader and Members of the House Republican Caucus,

You have been returned to the majority because most of the people of this nation have recognized that our country is facing a severe economic, social, fiscal and political crisis. The majority of voters in November of last year discerned that the Democrat majority under Speaker Pelosi had relinquished any semblance of fiscal responsibility that they may have ever held. In addition to their profligacy, their legislative agenda undermined the liberty of our citizens and generated more tension between the taxed and the beneficiaries. You were either elected or re-elected to stop the madness and to turn around from the disastrous direction that our United States of America clearly is headed.

We understand that many of you are career politicians who lust for office and the accolades that shower you. We understand that many of you may be honest and moral, but you appear to lack the finely honed principles that should guide you. You have taken an oath of office………

                                 I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

We have some questions for your consideration. Did you take the oath seriously? Do you understand the oath? How would you define “support and defend the Constitution?” Have you done so during your political career? Is a “good idea” necessarily Constitutional? Where do you personally draw the line about when to support the Constitution and when to ignore or dismiss it? Have you willingly violated your oath because the nation has needs that are not addressed by Article 1 Section 8? Or have you violated your oath because the Constitution has been abused by Congress for so long that it cannot be fixed….you know, that toothpaste back into the tube dilemma?

We know that Democrats lie, cheat and steal (votes) to move their agenda. We are grateful that, for the most part, you seek to fulfill your duties and obligations with honor and integrity. We want you, however, to be bold, courageous and principled….fight constantly and consistently for Constitutional principles and the restoration of personal liberty for all citizens of the United States. You appear to have resisted advancing ideas, strategies and legislation that would challenge this incremental march toward personal and economic tyranny because they might fail. I might add here that the incremental march has become a gallop. Why are you afraid to fail on a matter of principle? You should know that your vote to repeal the healthcare fiasco was appreciated, but we know that you have made no serious effort to defund it. In fact, during this debt ceiling/budget cuts kabuki dance, the President declared that his opening gambit for socialized medicine was “off the table,” and we hear nothing…….crickets from the House of Representatives. Many of the people who have supported you are sorely disappointed that your actions have been so feeble and so hesitant. We frankly do not care if Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi does not like you in fact we prefer it that way. Only a few of your members seem to understand that “business as usual” is no longer a viable option. The conditions in our country are no longer usual, they have become critical.

If you are reluctant to battle on principle because you may not have the votes, or the Senate will shoot it down, please note that when an underdog football team has a powerhouse on the schedule, they show up, get dressed and play the freakin’ game. They do not hide on the bus or refuse to leave the locker room. Their opponents may be faster, stronger and better coached, but once in a while the underdog wins. You cannot win if you refuse to get off the bus. I understand that expecting career politicians to be courageous could be classified as wishful thinking. I also understand that desiring you to stand for principles and Constitutional integrity may be asking for more than you are capable of delivering. I am aware that a principled Constitutional position may jeopardize your chances for re-election. Are you aware that some 235 years ago some men pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor? And you are worried about your image, your polling or your next election? If so, that is shameful. It is also a symptom of why we are in this current mess.

We heard you say many times during the last campaign that you had learned a lesson from the last time you had a majority, and the voters reacted with fury. I do not believe you. Learning a lesson should propel you to take bold action for the nation. Nibbling on the margins suggests that you are merely doing so for appearance’s sake. We suspect that many of you resent those of us who want smaller government, lower taxes and more personal freedom. Some of you believe that we are “kooks” or “wackos.”  We love our country, and we do not want to watch anyone destroy it….or simply stand by while it disintegrates. Please be bold. Be courageous. Be principled, and follow the Constitution…or have the guts to amend it. We, and I, will be watching you. Remember your oath or affirmation. Our nation is at risk, and we cannot afford to have you piddling around any longer.

Comment:   cearlwriting@hotmail.com       or         www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

   

Out Years, Doubt Years

Whenever you watch the career politicians address a spending issue such as we are facing at the current time, they propose a “glide path” toward fiscal sanity. Invariably the majority of the necessary budget cuts are scheduled for the “out years”….the years beyond what a normal person would determine is prudent forecasting. For example, the Paul Ryan budget proposal has the budget achieving balance in ten years (9 “out years”), but with 9 consecutive years of deficit spending the Ryan proposal would leave a national debt of $24 billion in the 10^th year. His plan went further in the out years with a supposition assuming years 11 and forward would generate surpluses for reducing the debt. Welcome to Fantasy Island.

The “out years” are a figment of creative political imaginations. They are more appropriately called the “doubt years” because it’s doubtful that any of the projections and assumptions in the original legislation will ever occur. Historically, the later years in long term forecasts have always been worse than the authors anticipated. Some of the more recent examples are LBJ’s War on Poverty which has squandered more than $6 trillion through the years, and our poverty rate is similar to what it was when the programs were initiated. Medicare is another glaring miscalculation (or intentional misrepresentation) as the program has far exceeded the expected costs.

There are a number of reasons for out year projections to be so woefully wrong. One is that no one can predict the future with any degree of certainty. A second is that no Congress can bind succeeding Congresses to budgetary items. The new Congress can increase or decrease (rarely done) the line items for a program without being constrained by the original estimates. Also, Congresspersons rely on the rosiest estimates and outlandish assumptions when they sell their program to their colleagues and the public. Finally, they lie…misrepresent, mischaracterize, misstate. With all due respect to Congressman Ryan, his scenario is much too optimistic, but even if it were “on the money,” it fails to solve our debt problem. By the time that the debt is being addressed, our $25 trillion hole may be too large to escape.

Despite the inadequacy of Mr. Ryan’s plan, his is the best one on the table so far. Senator Pat Toomey has introduced one that has a much steeper glide path and takes us to balance much faster, but it hasn’t had any hearings in the Senate and is also too reliant on “out year” performance. Because our fearful government officials have been raiding the candy store and giving the candy away for so many years, the size of the debt, the consequences of the debt, and the payback of the debt have grown too large for a glide path strategy to significantly correct the situation. Plus, politicians are not disciplined enough for it to work. If the political elites are serious about correcting our abysmal financial situation (I don’t believe that very many of them are), the remedy will have to be sudden and painful. Presently, roughly 43% of our annual federal expenditures are financed with borrowed funds (deficit). It should be apparent that any glide path of any length will continue to add to our $14.5 trillion debt. In addition, the political wrangling over the budget and appropriations will become more intense during the out years as politicians seek to protect favorite programs and constituencies. The most effective solution may be a radical two-pronged approach that will create massive displacement and disruption but should ignite an economic boom that should ameliorate much of the agony.

At the risk of repeating myself, the best template for restoring fiscal sanity to our federal government is to begin with the enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. Any other guide will fail because of emotional justifications for every program, agency and department in the federal system. Each of them represents a “good idea.” Every one of them addresses a “critical need. “ None of them are efficient or particularly effective, so the Constitutional formula would minimize debate about the efficacy or necessity for much of the deficit spending. A majority of Congress must be willing to fall on the hand grenade in order to pull our nation back from the brink of disaster. The “glide path” must be for two years…one House term because it is possible that the members with the courage to do the right thing will not be re-elected.

Those of us who believe in liberty, small Constitutional government and self-reliance must be willing and ready to suffer the concussion and absorb the shrapnel when the blast goes off. Who am I kidding? There are not enough politicians to take the heat and not enough citizens to absorb the shock. We’ll continue playing our games with our fragile future by kicking the can further down the road as the “out years” become the “doubt years.” Before too long the doubt will be replaced by dismal certainty. Reality is a cruel teacher.

Comment:    cearlwriting@hotmail.com     or    www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

  

Safety First

The Nanny State cares about you. The Nanny State wants you to live life without facing any adverse situations….well, without facing difficulties that have not been caused by government. You see, when life throws you curve balls, those are bad. When government throws you bean balls, those are called “shared sacrifices.” The Nanny State is committed to protecting you from every type of imaginable or potential harm…except for the damages inflicted by the government. Even when I personally resent the Nanny State’s annoying meddling in my life, I could, at some level, understand the insatiable desire by the government to control so many facets of my life if they were not ideologically and agenda driven constraints. Many of the limitations and regulations do not make sense from an economic or a safety point of view, but do satisfy some misbegotten ideological purpose.

A glaring example that we have previously discussed on these pages is the banning of the incandescent light bulb in favor of the compact fluorescent variety. For the moment the House has suspended the implementation of the policy, but government never gives in, never gives up. The insanity of an ideological unproven “global warming” scare leading Congress and the EPA to ban a tried and true technology and replace it with a toxic-laden substitute illustrates the folly of much government regulation—particularly the ideological-driven rules. The collectivist attitude is blatantly apparent in this regulatory fiasco….preserve the planet from a theoretical future of global warming, but put individuals at risk with more expensive deadly products.

When any child loses his or her life, it is a tragic circumstance. According to the Product Safety Commission, in the last ten years 32 children have been mortally injured by baby cribs with sliding adjustable sides. With the publishing of the data the PSC has arbitrarily determined that ALL parents are too stupid or lack discernment to choose a crib for their children that is not so risky. So, they have banned the sliding-side infant crib, and forbade reselling of older models at garage sales and thrift shops. We are waiting for a definitive rule that bans “giving” the lethal cribs from one family member to another as has been the historical norm. While 32 deaths are regrettable and heart-breaking, the banning of the crib can, to some degree, affect nearly all of the 308 million residents of the nation.

Unlike the infant crib regulatory ban, RU-486, the “morning after pill,” is ideologically and politically correct. The statists promote unrestrained abortion, and resist any attempt to curtail the deadly industry. It is apparent that ideology trumps safety when the impact of RU-486 is examined. According to analyst David Alton of Great Britain, roughly 5-8% of RU-486 users experience severe complications…including death. So, the obvious question is “why are sliding-side baby cribs banned because of their dangerous potential when RU-486 has a much higher level of malfunctioning?” Clearly the answer is that Big Government and the Nanny State are driven by ideological considerations. Aborted children and their deceased mothers are an acceptable risk to preserve the right to destroy children at will according to the government’s priorities.

As the government and the multiplicity of agencies, bureaus and departments roam the country looking for ways to make my life better and safer, the unspoken factor is that every little regulation that makes my life safer also limits my freedom. Many would argue that the comprehensive examination conducted by the TSA at our airports is necessary to protect us from nefarious characters. We know, however, that their “so-called” random extensive observations have no basis in reality other than mere statistical happenstance. Profiling is forbidden because it may be deemed as discriminatory whereas groping small children and little old ladies in wheelchairs is considered acceptable. Once again, the Nanny State’s efforts to enhance our safety do little to make us safer and do restrict our personal liberty.

Finally, this observation does not involve product safety or the efficacy of pharmaceuticals. I wonder how can a government that is so concerned with the potential safety of every citizen when they interact with the private sector, be so nonchalant about high-level bombing using aircraft and drones? The resultant collateral damage from those sorties exceeds the losses by far from some of the issues they seek to regulate. Does our federal government practice gross discrimination by assuming that Libyan civilians or Afghanis are not as valuable as U.S. residents? Or is it that Nanny State’s real concern is for the power to control us? Our actual safety and well-being are secondary considerations. Every little regulatory element places another nail in our boxes. The motto of the new order is “safety first, liberty never, state forever.” Enjoy your safe trip toward tyranny, because it will be nearly impossible to come back.

Comment:   cearlwriting@hotmail.com     or     www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

You Bet Your Assets

We typically think of assets as hard goods….things, but we know that some assets may be intangible. For example, your savings in a bank or your portfolio are not tangible. They are sheets of paper or printouts that represent to some degree hard assets. Other assets are not typically included in one’s balance sheet such as education, talent, skills and ambition. I have included some other descriptors for assets that are not generally included on the net worth ledger of a nation.

When one examines the real value of a country, there are some classifications of assets that rarely are manifested on the plus side of the balance sheet. “Known potential” is the class of valuable resources that are, as yet, untapped, but do have a clearly defined and measured potential for contributing to the national economy. Oil deposits, gas pockets and coal veins are representative of some of the known potential that we have in the United States…on land and in the water. Within the National Park Service are thousands of acres of land that might be developed for agricultural production as well as for the exploitation of energy and mineral resources. Another known potential is the 15 million or more unemployed people in the United States whose labor and innovative skills could be much better used than they are at the present time.

“Unknown potential” refers to resources that have not yet been calculated but whose potential could be significant if the right technology or extraction methods were employed. Desalination of seawater is such a resource…not just for drinking, but for irrigation purposes. If such a technology were to become feasible on a large scale, many acres of semi-arid and desert lands could be used for food and fiber production. In addition to the technological challenges, the development of the system would have to be concerned with recapturing of spent water. So, the potential does indeed exist although the means for realizing its full value is not yet available. Wind and solar power are at a similar stage. While energy can be reaped from them, they lack storage capacity, cost effectiveness and reliability before they can be considered as bona fide sources. The potential is great, but more and better technology must be achieved before any of these potential sources can be consistently used.

Exploited assets are those resources that have been identified and reworked to create value. No resource, natural or human, has any real value unless it can be utilized to increase its inherent worth. Oil, for example, is merely a messy black liquid, but when refined it produces plastics, diesel fuel, gasoline and other by-products which function to fuel other industries as they create, construct or assemble items of value for the economy. Likewise, land has no intrinsic value unless it can produce food, fiber or provide other means of enhancing life. The exploited assets, therefore are those that are presently being used to increase value and economic activity.

Inaccessible assets are those that may exist in quantities great enough for meaningful use, but either for natural reasons, technological reasons or political reasons are not presently available. Vast quantities of geothermal power are trapped within the Earth, but we have not yet developed the means to exploit it on a grand scale because of natural barriers and technological deficiencies. Another inaccessible resource is children (at least in Western cultures). True, in some subsistence and emerging economies, children play an important role, but in most developed Western systems, the political consensus is that children are not considered integral members of the work force.

What is the purpose of this column? My goal is to illustrate that despite our current economic woes, we are a nation of vast resources. If our government would stop its punitive regulatory and taxation policies, many of our human and natural resources would be unleashed to produce products and increase the value of raw material. If government would cease its direct intervention and control of several vital deposits of exploitable resources, the private sector could transform them from potential to actual contributors to the nation’s economic activity. In addition, the development of many of our potential resources would increase the need for labor thus better utilizing the untapped human resources who are currently idle.

Government does not produce anything. All government activity is a drain on the economy … not a contributor. When government consumes 25% of the generated economy (GDP), funds become limited for economic activity that increases value. The two-edged stiletto wherein government places the knife firmly into the back of the nation is when government controls, regulates or limits resource development and when government consumes an inordinate portion of economic wealth. Our nation is not poor because we have a large cache of resources, but because of too-large government involvement, our economy is performing poorly. Government is non-productive and antithetical to generating value and wealth. Under our present economic circumstances, we cannot afford to have government control our wealth. Their consumption of the labor and productive power of the people places our potential for prosperity in peril. Government’s busy-body over regulating and rulemaking severely undermines the economic capacity of the nation. When Big Government is a player, the gap between prosperity and poverty looms large.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com      or     www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com