By Larry Leonard
July 8, 2012 — When Obama took over, he inherited a 7% UER (unemployment rate) from George Bush. The UER today is a fake 8.2%. Those who have run out of unemployment checks or just given up looking for a job are not included in the UER report numbers the media puts out. By disappearing from the the basic number statistic, they reduce the published UER rate.) The real UER is somewhere above 10%. Maybe close to 12%.
The government number you see in the paper and on TV, counts only people who have been looking for work and have been recorded doing it in places where they could be added to the data base — in the last 4 weeks. If somebody looking for work walks into a back country farm equipment repair shop or small restaurant in Oregon, the odds are they aren’t included in the data base. So, the UER is useful only as a relative baseline. If you have lived long enough to have been around during good times and bad times, and know that the UER was 5% in good times and 8% in bad times, then the number has meaning to you. Until Pelosi and Reid took Congress, halfway through Bush II’s second term, his best UER was under 4%. Wouldn’t we love to live to see that, again. (A statement, not a question.)
Now, for an election comparison, Ronald Reagan won a second term with a 7% UER, because the number he inherited from Jimmy Carter was 10%. With his tax cuts and policy with respect to business, things were getting better. Even without college degrees in economics, the folks in flyover country (Tea Party Territory) can smell a recovery actually happening.
And now, another election time is fast approaching. For a choice,we have Obama vs. Romney. The subject is the economy.
Public Works: The bigger the better
￼What is Obama’s economic “program?” Well, he likes “public investment in infrastructure,” which means billions upon hundreds of billions upon trillions of taxpayer dollars spent for gigantic government projects. As we have said before in these pages, socialists love gigantic government projects. The reason is that the government press can take photos and video of such projects. The public can see a worker’s camp full of happy Soviet families hanging out the family wash with the happy children helping, and an army of healthy (graphic left) workers like ants swarming over the project. Dams are an example. They are huge and while under construction employ thousands of people. Hoover Dam on the Colorado River and the dams on the Columbia, here in the Pacific Northwest, are (or, at least were) examples.
No photo or video of the workers camps for those projects after they were finished was displayed in the media. Empty work camps whose workers are out of a job and gone to look for new employment are not positive political graphics.
On the smaller socialist scale, Obama loves funding the “green energy” sector. There are dozens of them on his list. Oceanic algae farms growing and manufacturing bio fuels. Solyndra, in California, made solar cell panels. (Direct conversion of sunlight into electricity.) China uses urban slave labor in their solar cell factories, and artificially plays with their own currency on the world market — underpricing competition. American investors know about this. Donald Trump is always complaining about it on FOX. Anyway, Obama funded California’s Solyndra (to name one such manufacturing “startup,”) until they went broke. At least a half a billion taxpayer dollars have gone down that hole. A descendant of a man who used to drink coffee in our breakfast nook, Henry J. Kaiser, was part of that game, and has escaped the disaster because of government loan guarantees.
What is going on here? The Silicon Valley in California is loaded with private investment capital generated during the rise of the computer industry, but those people, like Romney, are business people. They know better than to put good money after bad money. When they do something stupid like that, the money they lose is their own. But, a liberal president can “invest” trillions in a bad idea without threat of loss because the money he is “investing” isn’t his own cash. It is your money, taken from you by taxation. Whether or not it makes a profit doesn’t matter to him. He gets paid whether the project works or not.
So, what’s his benefit in this case? What is his profit, here? Simple. He is supported by socialists from the “green” arena in America. (All dope-smoking, long-haired hippies are socialists.) From Oregon’s Nike to California’s Apple, they are all (1) brilliant scientific, engineering and marketing (sales) people and (2) big fans of Cher, Alec Baldwin and Jane Fonda. They all believe in Man-caused Global Warming. So, some of them combine their affections by getting on their hero Obama’s train, and as soon as they receive taxpayer grants and loan guarantees, they send part of it back to his campaign committee. (Would you be amazed to hear that millions of government bailout cash that went to car company unions has found its way to Obama’s campaign fund?)
Everything he does operates like that, by the way. Payback is pure Chicago ward politics. The big corporation bailouts? Money back to his campaign coffers. The G.E. bailout? The giant car company bailouts? The big bank bailouts? Same thing. It’s all about a man’s priorities. What is more important, a thriving economy or Obama’s re-election? That is, what’s more important to him?
So, who is Mitt Romney?
Like all but one of the Mormons I’ve known, he is loyal to his faith, conservatively dressed, mannerly in speech and has a passel of kids, all of whom have neat haircuts. He gave most if not all of the money he inherited to his college, BYU, then set out to make a living on his own. He worked with a private Capital company, Bain, for a while. They searched for businesses that were in rocky financial shape, took them over and introduced better business procedures. Perhaps 3/4 of them turned around and became profitable. A quarter of them did not. Romney and his business friends couldn’t come up with an approach that could save them, all, which means he isn’t perfect. You hear a lot from the MSM about that company. Takeover Vultures, scavengers, fire everybody, sell the assets and run types — are how the media liberals describe them.
What did this activity actually mean to the American economy?
Two things: money to the treasury and less need for welfare. While all of Obama’s “investments” cost the nation trillions of taxpayer dollars and are gone for good, none of Romney’s projects cost a dime of taxpayer funds while the 3/4 of them that revived saved tens of thousands of private sector jobs and kept thousands of families off the government dole. From here at Oregon Magazine, our rough numbers say that the taxes paid by all the jobs Romney saved during those years pretty close to equals the cost of Obama’s infrastructure and crony capitalist boondoggles up to about the fall of 2011, at least.
So, part, possibly most, of the reason our national debt hasn’t taken the nation off the financial cliff, was Romney’s successes in rehabilitating all those companies. Those folks continued paying taxes and didn’t go on welfare and food stamps.
Here, I’ll repeat that. Every dollar Obama has spent — up to some time last year — may (we think) have over the years been matched (offset) by the people whose jobs Romney saved. If spending had been frozen at the 2009 level, the deficit/debt picture would by now be very different. That deficit/debt speedometer you see on our cover page, and many other sites, would be slowing down, frozen or starting to back up. I’ve seen it happen. A Congress with Newt Ginrich, plus Bill Clinton’s desire to be re-elected did it.
It’s about which logger has the chainsaw
Mitt is how honest capitalism works when Socialists don’t wield the tax and regulatory axe.. Businessmen like Romney invest their own money to generate private sector jobs. Those jobs produce trillions in tax revenues which go to pay the bills. Disasters are created by the big government spenders like Obama. Here’s how Shakespeare described it:
Once more, from a fundamentals standpoint, both the theory and practice go like this: private sector jobs don’t cost the taxpayers anything. Government jobs (or “private sector” jobs generated by government “investments”) are the reverse. They are financed (capitalized/funded) by you. Most of them fail. Government is good at failure. But of those government startups and bailouts that do not fail, the tax revenues they bring to the Treasury were financed (capitalized) by tax revenues from the Treasury.
This isn’t rocket science, people. It’s common sense.
Of the two philosophies, the one that generates the most return for the least (zero, actually) cost to the taxpayer is the Romney approach. (A secret: the “plan” to achieve it takes one sentence to describe. Get the government the hell out of the picture and off the backs of business.) Just as a final aside, this last approach was the one the nation used for it’s first 200+ years. It made this nation the best place to be for centuries and is why folks keep trying to get in, instead of out.
Peruse a little history. The Soviet Union went broke. Cuba is broke. North Korea is broke. Greece is going broke. China is starting to wobble. Japan and Germany, both capitalist nations have solid economies — though Japan is showing some signs of weakness because of spending policies. (Socialism) But, just look around. See if you can find another nation that rose from nothing to the number one economy and military power on Earth in two centuries.
That should help you decide what needs to be fixed in America, and so who to vote for, come November.