The View From 1776

What’s Wrong With the U.S.?

Read Mark Thornton’s assessment on the website.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/06 at 10:14 PM
  1. Which is why I have said that if you put the reforms in that we need, it would be committing political suicide.

    This has to run its course. The people have to get what they want and then see what it costs them.

    We can't grow or tax out of this but, we may be able to delay it for a while.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  05/06  at  10:43 PM
  2. I will tell you what I think. This is another stupid conclusion from the Mises people. And The View is no smarter in relating it. It is hollow and cheap to argue what they are arguing, especially when they espouse to be as learned as they are.

    Both The View and Mises are seeing that ordinary citizens are at fault when it is really the greed of the powers that be and its incompetent management who is really to blame for the shit America is in. The political entity of the last eight years is what put that power in play, at the expense of the entire country and ordinary folk.

    Mises and The View, in their ignorance and ideology, have set up false entities to explain America's failed economics. Such conclusions on their part shows that they are just as irrational and dumb as those they portray to be.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/06  at  11:55 PM
  3. During my 30-year career as a Fifth Grade Teacher, I would often ask the class if they each would know how to take care of a pet I might give them.

    They always said yes. Then they would follow their affirmation with a question; "What kind of a pet?"

    I would often say, a canary, or a puppy dog, or a gold-fish. Would you treat them all the same? Why?

    They cried, "No; they are different!!!"

    When we talked about the greatest Nation in human history, America, I asked them why. "What is so unique about America?"

    In a very short time they understood that America was the first Nation to base its Founding on the finest most accurate definition of "human being."

    Endowed by their Creator with "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Power of government vested in the People. A People of unique individual value - with Freedom of opportunity. Willing to be responsible. Equipped with personal Criteria for choice-making. Capable.

    They got it!

    Too many of our selected leaders and blessed followers couldn't make muster in the Fifth Grade today...
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  05/07  at  01:29 AM
  4. David Brooks of the New York Times wrote a good essay in its pages the other day. In it he endeavored to explain where Republicans and conservatives have gone wrong in their leadership, which often reaflects a simple grade five mindset.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/07  at  08:51 AM
  5. A "simple grade five mindset" is what is missing.

    Human defined: Earth's Choicemaker, cannot be replaced or improved by collectivists, humanists, or compromisers.

    The principles of our founding are still the superior criteria for judgement of bad and superior. If they are not conserved, their replacement will prove itself chaotic and disfunctional. Pragmatism? HA! Slow learners, still...

    Left, Right,or Center; they still need a compass.
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  05/07  at  09:27 AM
  6. The article by Brooks is not good for he doesn't separate community from federal government. Both parties have been bad because they have done too much from Washington that should have been done from the community level and state at the most.

    The nation was designed where the community would have the most government power (the most regulation) so that each community could reflect the values, religions, beliefs, needs, resources, etc.

    Centralizing those things that reflect those individual characteristics of each community are what both parties have damaged over the years. The book, "America: Running on Empty" by Petereson, is a good analysis of why both parties are bad for America.

    However, the main reason they are bad is that they both use the CFR and Bilderbergs to staff their cabinets and adviser positions and fund their campaigns. They are the ultimate victims of "group think" in that you don't make it to the level of appointment unless you agree with their goals.

    Their belief in the current monetary principles we use, Keynesian economics and globalization done in a manner that is damaging the working men and women is the foundation of both party's policies. They are behind most of the foreign policy decisions and our military operations, etc.

    All but about 2 presidents have come from their ranks and while they differ in social areas, they have too much in common in other areas and those areas are the most damaging.

    What the current President is doing is straight from the Central Banking play book and is increasing the risk to the dollar rapidly. We are trying to solve our economic problems with the very methods that got us into the mess. That means we may delay it but, will also make it worse when it does unwind.

    In both parties over the decades, we have had sincere people who believed they were doing the right thing but, were advised by their party's experts in ways that was actually bad for the nation in the long run.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  05/07  at  10:21 AM
  7. I'm not so sure that our political parties actually believe in much of anything other than that they must be reelected. The bennys and perks of national office are crazy. One term in congress and you're set for life. Multiple terms with a commitee chairmanship and you're a very wealthy man. Keynesian econmics as rationalized by those who belive they need to buy votes is only a means to an end. Even keynes would be shocked by how his theories have been used and abused by the political class. A heavily regulated, taxed and consumption based economy fueled by debt rather than by production and savings won't work for long (how can it?). The only thing that sustains it at this point are bubbles that need to be blown from time to time. A phony, short-term inflationary boom may be coming but it won't end well. Anyone notice treasury prices/yields today? The fed will probably be stepping in to buy tomorrow to calm the boobs down and keep equity prices stable to moving higher. Ride the wave. They'd like to see a new bubble in equities at least through the mid-term elections. Watch the employment numbers as well. Bet they are better than expected, suprise-surprise! To DA the boy genius: The folks at Mises have been calling this unfolding of the economy for years. You haven't a clue. You prove Thornton's point with your ramblings.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/07  at  02:29 PM
  8. The original post is kind of silly. It was an article based on the responses of an AARP survey. Such surveys have little values because the structure of the questions is usually idiotic or overly general and do not allow for answering in any meaningful way.

    For instance:

    "Medical insurance is a good thing"

    [] Strongly agree
    [] Agree
    [] Disagree
    [] Strongly disagree

    Why waste your time on such garbage?
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/07  at  05:13 PM
  9. The questions were faitfully reported by Mr Thornton. They all begin with "...the governmnet should..". Hard to escape his conclusions about the cargo cult mentality which has developed in this country. It's tiring to hear guys like you on the left continue to just make things up as you go along. The opinions of economic fantasists and ideological cave dwellers are worthless. Facts are facts.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/07  at  05:28 PM
  10. The short answer is: "Government". At all levels it has become desturctive to the ends of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. It has become unmoored from the constitution and it has ceased to be a government of enumerated and delagated powers. Its interference into the voluntary interactions of private citizens is immoral.
    Government is an exercise of power and as such must be at all times and all places limited. It is incapable of providing those things that people are able to provide for themselves no matter what your good intentions are. The New Deal, the Great Society, and the Obamanation have to be rolled back if we are ever to regain our liberty.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/07  at  08:58 PM
  11. Government fails a human IQ Test whenever it considers itself the source of its own power.

    Socialism was birthed by retarded buffoons and is supported by those dumber yet.

    See what happens when people have no criteria higher than belly-button...
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  05/08  at  12:47 AM
  12. Again, Baxter, you articluate yourself like an ass. Hee haw!
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/08  at  10:11 AM
  13. I think this is related to what's wrong with the U.S:

    I was listening to Dick Cheney, and his truth, going on about how the Obama administration is stripping many of his administration's policies that helped make America safe after 9/11. But he didn't recognize how many Bush&Co; policies contributed to making America less safe.

    Bush&Co;. managed to make America less safe through disastrously executing two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. By running those two wars so incompetently it managed to enable the enemy and increase its numbers. The situation in Afghanistan and the rise of the Taliban there and in Pakistan is a perfect example.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/10  at  11:54 AM
  14. Bush has many faults. I'm not a fan. Running politically correct wars in answer to the attack by radical Islamists was his first mistake. Enlarging the scope of the federal 'security' apparatus was his next, particularly in light of the temeperament of his successor. The country has not been attacked since, however.

    The issue at hand is the nature of the thinking of the American's polled in this AARP survey and how they seem to belive that governmnet is the source of their liberty. What's upsetting is how that ignorance is being used to justify the power grab occurring now. When government encourages confusion, fear and misdirection, all sensible people should be concerned. We've been saddled with bad government and bad economic policies since the 1930's and a return to first principles has been almost impossible as this social/democracy has developed since. The central state has taken on enormous power during this period and will not watch the diminution of that power occur without putting up a fight. Fannie Mae, freddie Mac, the Federal Reserve, the Community re-Investmnet Act, the creation of the departmnts of Agriculture, Energy, education and 'homeland security', the implosion of social security and medicare coming down the road, the unjust and arbitrary direct tax on 'income' and the power it has given the feds to run social engineering experiments on the populace without regard to any constitutional limitations are all failures of government overstepping it's powers. That is the cause of the misallocation of capital and malinvestment, as well as the support for the economic, political and historical ignorance which is at the root of the current economic 'crisis'.

    The policies of the new administration however, seem to be based on the Mugabe school of economics and will end in disaster. It's an idiot's approach or that of one who wishes to cripple the economy in an attempt to grab power.A new federal police force is apparantly being quietly formed which will report directly to the president. It's imporatnt that economic chaos reign in order to create the desperation needed to support such thuggishness so there should be some concern about what our president is thinking.

    Bush comes from an old family of government with the nobless oblige that some similarly situated American families have developed over the years. They can't see the dangers that governmnet presents to freedom and economic efficiency since, like the current president, it's been so good to them. That is the nature and the danger of the rent-seeking behavior that inevitably develops under unchecked governmnet. A governmnet powerful enough to give you everthing you need is powerful enough to take everything you have. When push comes to shove, all we have are our God given rights that this governmnet was originally established to protect. When those are gone we have nothing except government gurantees as valuable as the paper on which they are printed.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/10  at  03:43 PM
  15. "The country has not been attacked since, however."

    This is no indication or proof that Bush did the right thing.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/11  at  07:58 AM
  16. Facts are 'indications'. If you want 'proof' don't muck around in governmnet or politics. It ain't science, little guy.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/11  at  09:58 AM
  17. Don't forget, Bush let the attacks of 9/11 occur. He was warned about the possibility of such attacks.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/11  at  10:38 AM
  18. Don't forget, take your meds.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/11  at  11:09 AM
  19. David, where did the warnings say the attacks would occur? Which airlines were mentioned and which targets were mentioned. If they were just warnings that airplanes would be used to strike, how would you prevent it?

    I do thing that we were very lax in many ways on our security but, I also don't want to create the wrong image either.

    For example, when FDR created a plan to antagonize Japan into a first strike, he didn't know the details of exactly how big the strike would be nor until just before, where it would likely be (at sea or a land based strike).

    Our government has used crisis for decades to create the public will to do things the people behind the scenes want done. That doesn't mean they know exactly what will be done when they relax security.

    But, to blame Bush for something he probably didn't even know was going on doesn't make sense either because he would have depended not only on the people telling him about any warnings but on their assurance they were "on top of it."

    President don't "control" what goes on. The create teams and usually those teams were picked for him, just like they were picked for this President from the organizations created by the International Banking Cartel. The people behind the scenes in both administrations do all kinds of things the President never is told about because if told, he might not agree.

    Presidents are figure heads that have their campaigns funded by the major corporations and banks so they will do what is best for those elite that fund the campaigns through those corporations and banks. They don't run the nation. The powers behind them run the nation.

    That is why this President is doing all the things that Bush was that are adding risk to the dollar and our economy in the long run. Like Bush, he is trying to delay the collapse as long a possible by doing what the financial advisers tell him has to be done.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  05/11  at  11:17 AM
  20. Bush was briefed about a possible attack. I believe in August of 2001. I understand he wave of the briefer off with a dismissive tone. It's documented. When I find the reference I'll let you know.

    Anyway, when you look back the Bush years seem to have accomplished very little. In fact, America seems to have gone backwards under his administration.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/11  at  12:17 PM
  21. I agree the nation went backward under Bush just as it is under this President and Clinton and Bush I and Reagan and Carter and so on. We have been going backwards for decades.

    But, did the warning include which airlines and what date and what targets. If they didn't, they were basically meaningless because we have always known they were planning attacks.

    You have to have specifics or the warning is just confirming all the other warnings we received while Clinton and Bush I were in office. They were nothing new other than possible planes would be used.

    We probably already expected that as well. But, we kept our security lax for a couple of reasons. One, until an attack, consumers would have pitched a fit with congress for the inconvenience. Sadly, we are a nation where we don't act until a crisis forces it. That is also true of our government. They keep things at levels that are less that probably best but, that is not how we have operated for decades, not just because Bush was in office.

    The whole U.S. government system is broken and needs massive reform regardless of which party is in office. That should be obvious now that we have a total control of the government by democrats and are still doing what Bush did.

    We have a nation that is spiraling out of control due to a debt based growth system that has caught up with us.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  05/11  at  01:34 PM
  22. We've been going backwards for years. The u-turn began with the transition that occurred when 'liberalism' became collectivism, fascism and statism. The progressive fixation on the rule by experts led to the creation of the huge centralized bureaucracy with power being placed in the hands of those furthest away from the people. A really dumb idea. (but so progressive!!)

    In retrospect, it was a kind of institutionalized naivety (stupidity?) calling the shots since it was forgotten that bureaucracies are made up of people and people act in their own interests- Everywhere and at all times! (Why the last thing unaccountable bureaucracies should be given is the power to coerce). Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy (all naively going along with the program?) LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter-the dummy (a small respite with Reagan whose main goal was putting the USSR out of business), G. Bush (voodoo econmics?), Clinton, GW Bush and Obama (spread the wealth?) were/are historically challenged folks. FDR, LBJ and BHO might just be the most dangerous chief executives the country has ever seen simply because they seem to have believed the bullshit or cynically know/knew that it is only a means to power. (It's really that simple: if you believe, you're an historical illiterate. If you understand the power angle you are a potential tyrant).

    Some would like to think that FDR was ignorantly caught up in the zeitgeist. Like Richard (We're all Keynesians Now) Nixon, Ford (the likable dunce), Carter and the self-interested Bushes who all seem to look kindly on the guy who gave the world, through his encouragemnet, Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin, or LBJ who saw it as a means to consolidate power. A redneck southern political hack who gave the store away (The Great Society Scam?) for that power while modern 'liberals' are too stupid to understand the pure cynicism involved? Pathetic!

    The 'Great (White) Father in Washington' has no clothes. He's only a flawed human being like you and me. Realizing that simple fact is the first step on the road to recovery, away from accepting the wizard of oz kind of politics that some of you guys seem to love so much. Grow up. If you need so much to venerate something, worship God and turn away from your counterproductive, statist totems. The state is dangerous and must be constrained. That is an historical reality understood completely by the American founders.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  05/11  at  05:30 PM
  23. Excellent article and as always the discussion
    Posted by Reverse Phone Lookup  on  05/12  at  04:57 AM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.