--------------
He writes: Steve Daines recently told the truth-challenged Republican Convention that “government doesn’t create jobs.” Nor can government create wealth, according to a recent letter by a local Daines supporter, defending Daines’ “Less Government, More Jobs” theme. This kind of thinking (government VERSUS jobs and wealth) ignores reality. (Note the insertion of the word "versus," used to modify the meaning of the quote so as to serve Mr. Benert's purposes.)
First of all, a country’s wealth can’t be measured only in dollars and cents. When hatred of government (A fallacy right off the starting line. The Right does not hate government, it wants limited, constitutional government. It is an oft-repeated talking point of the Left whenever criticism of government manifests that the Right hates government, usually tied to the inane Somalia Argument.)
leads to unalterable opposition to all new or increased taxes, (If there is one thing republicans have done over the course of decades, it is back off regarding their supposed opposition to increasing taxes to the Left. That is what the Left calls "compromise," a highly valued principle, so long as the Left isn't doing the compromise.)
down goes our system of social services and schools, (Apparently, these are the only things government does, and thus the only things that can be cut. A persistent leftist strawman designed to divert the conversation.
It sounds to me like Mr. Benert is taking the position that ever-increasing taxes is the only way to have a system of social services and schools, which is another way of saying that the only reason that social programs are going bankrupt is because of the stingy taxpayer refusing to fund them adequately.
Oh, and it is worth mentioning that schools are funded by state and local taxes, so what the feds do is a separate issue.)
along with our natural and cultural environment that constitute our true wealth as a nation. (Now this is novel thinking. I don't think I've heard anyone on the Left claim that government programs are wealth. I therefore am now in favor of taxing the wealthy!
Ok, anyway. Mr. Benert is substituting concepts here. When we gaze out over the fruited plain, the purple mountains, and the seas white with foam, we are remiss if we do not marvel at their beauty, celebrating the bounty and "wealth" of these grand vistas, the profound blessing God has bestowed upon us. Wealth that was not created by government, of course, and is quarantined from use by the these self-same guardians of all that is true.
Nor has government created cultural wealth. In reality, one could reasonably assert that government has degraded culture and society by impoverishing the inner city with destructive wealth transfer programs thereby ensuring a perpetual lower class, and a middle class that is reeling from its government-imposed obligations.
Like cultural wealth, real tangible wealth results from the voluntary exchanges of value between private parties. The government ought to have no role in these private, legal, consensual exchanges, except to prosecute lawbreakers. Wealth comes from the efforts and imaginations of individuals unencumbered by a nanny government.)
Secondly, countless jobs and immense wealth have indeed been produced through government-sponsored transportation, energy, communication and research facilities. Think of our Interstate highways or the many spin-offs from the military or the moon-landing. (Might we remind Mr. Benert that every single dollar for these grand government projects was sourced from hard-working private individuals? Second, Mr. Benert cannot know that these would not have come about without government. Third, he must recognize that transportation projects like freeways now channel ozone-depleting vehicles all over the country, spewing their toxic brew of greenhouse gases. Fourth, infrastructure is subsequent to business, that is, the entrepreneur began to prosper, eventually hiring people, building a factory, which grew and generated wealth to the point that infrastructure was needed. In other words, a taxee is needed in order for there to be a taxer.
Fifth, no new jobs resulted from these grand government projects, because tax dollars were taken from private parties so that the government could redistribute that money. These private parties then then had less money to spend on things, less money to hire people themselves, and who then had to reduce their standard of living so that government could go off and recklessly fritter away their hard-earned dollars on all manner of foolish things.)
The idiotic “We Built It” signs in Tampa totally (and, I suspect, willfully) missed Obama’s ineptly-stated point in this regard. (Inept? If Obama was speaking ineptly, why then is it so outrageous to Mr. Benert that people could then misconstrue his remarks? But really, Obama's intent was clearly stated. He was manifestly hostile to the idea that people, through their own ingenuity and hard work, could make a good life for themselves apart from government programs. Despite Mr. Benert's lame protestations to the contrary, Obama's clear intent was to denigrate hard work and private enterprise, and to elevate government intervention into peoples' lives.)
A vote for Daines, or any other Republican, is a vote for more austerity and slow recovery. (I wonder if Mr. Benert re-read this sentence before he sent it off. The house, senate, and presidency were controlled by democrats for Obama's first two years. Democrats have controlled large portions of government for decades. And the government of their creation is borrowing 40% of what it spends. We have had 4 straight years of trillion-plus deficits.
During the Bush years, we had an huge upramping of spending, spending which has continued unabated despite the supposed "recovery."
The results of all of this is, of course, our present situation. With Mr. Benert's beloved president/savior at the helm, we've already had austerity and slow recovery. That is, PERSONAL austerity, not government austerity. Government in no way has been austere. It has cut back on nothing. It has done without in no way.
Yet for some puzzling reason, Mr. Benert believes that a vote for the party NOT IN POWER will continue the slow recovery. Wha...?)
Our economy needs investment. (Again, we've had trillions of dollars of redistributive government "investment," with nothing to show for it but a national debt of $16 trillion, 17% true unemployment, and neighborhoods being laid waste by crime and poverty. And he wants more!)
If the private sector won’t invest, government must. (He states this as if it were axiomatic. But if ever there was a text-book refutation of this vapid Keynsian idea, it is all around us right now.
Oh, and would it be prudent to ask why the private sector isn't investing? The private sector will be much more conservative with its dollars in times of uncertainty, and rightly so.
Businesses do not know how much obamacare will cost. They do not have confidence that duly executed contracts (like mortgages) will not be summarily revised by government. They can't be sure that if they issue bonds in order to expand or hire that government won't come in and nullify the bonds (like what happened with GM).
Government and its leftist cheerleaders cannot seem to acknowledge the truth about the country's perilous financial condition, let alone make progress in reversing its course. In fact, people like Mr. Benert want to increase the pace to destruction! So no one should be surprised that business is tending to sit on the sidelines.)
Jobs created through growth in the public sector and wisely-issued contracts with private businesses do create wealth, Mr. Daines. (Reasserting your point does not establish it, Mr. Benert. You've offered no evidence at all except bare assertions. To the contrary, the evidence is all around us that what you advocate has failed, and failed spectacularly.
It is funny that Mr. Benert uses the phrase "wisely-issued," given the monumental failure of such collaborations, including green energy companies like Solyndra. I would challenge Mr. Benert to produce one significant "public/private" collaboration that did not produce significant waste, fraud, abuse, and/or criminality. Oh, and by the way, isn't what Mr. Benert is advocating also known as "crony capitalism?"
So what we have read from Mr. Benert is to correct the record for "truth-challenged republicans." Irony is truly lost on the ironic.)
No comments:
Post a Comment