Monday, September 19, 2011

Economics: We Are The Wrench In The Flywheel

"We, the people of the United States, in order to . . . . . ." Yeah, you get the idea. This country, it's us. The problem is that while we've the right to form a more perfect union, we don't quite know how to go about doing it.

Freeing ourselves from England allowed us to make great progress. But that was then. This is now. We've gone over some bumps along the way, e.g. the great depression. But, then, Europe didn't do so well either. Along comes Marx and Lenin fighting for the down trodden masses. And, in truth, there were lots of Russian masses trodden down by the Czar and the landed gentry. But what did communism accomplish? It simply took the masses from under the Czar to Stalin, who also trod on the masses (and everyone else) and did so no less cruelly than the Czar. (Okay, initially the Jews weren't quite as down trodden by Stalin. But, it didn't last long. Soon the Jews were just as abused as all the other Russians and then some.)

Capitalism hit its stride with the advent of the industrial revolution. (It needed lots of capital.) But, for American miners, steel workers, sweat shop workers and others, things weren't all that great. But, if you could get someone else to work for you, whether in a mine, or in a factory, or at a sewing machine, and you had some idea of what you were doing, you could now rise in station. And, if you were very lucky, you could become a capitalist.

The workers was helped by three developments; namely, unions, technology (it allowed for greater worker productivity), and a labor shortage brought on by WW II. But, there then occurred something whose debilitating consequences were entirely unforeseen. (Actually, most of what we've experienced has been largely unforeseen.) It started when politicians began teaming up with the unions. This resulted in the tortured passage of free trade acts, a National Labor Relations Board that would deny a company like Boeing the right to open a new factory in a right-to-work state, and demands on industry that they pay medical benefits far exceeding their ability to fund.

So, have we reached a dead end? I think not. Here's what needs to be done.

1. Politicians must trim back the entitlements they have bestowed upon the public. The politicians as servants of the people can't be permitted to vote for unsustainable entitlement programs simply because it enhances their chances of getting re-elected.

2. Public service workers, e.g. cops, firemen, teachers, their administrators and the like, must be denied the ability to squeeze out of the public more than is appropriate. In brief, a new way must be found to negotiate their contracts. The way it's been done heretofore is entirely unacceptable. (Well, there goes that voting block.)

3. Re-do our tax system so that the government is not in a position to pick winners and losers. Let the market do that. And, that goes for both companies and the public.

4. Improve the productivity of the American worker. That's done through education. But, here, the politicians seem no smarter than the average town idiot.

5. Avoid simple-minded fixes. Do what's really needed. Enforce anti-trust laws. We do need our Robinson-Patman law to disallow price fixing and other kinds of behavior that interferes with the workings of a free market. What we don't need are legislators like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, who for reasons of their own have leaned on (and quite heavily) banks to force them to make "ninja" loans. (Loans where the borrower has no income, no job, and no assets.) Oh, and lest I forget, get rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Let their CEOs get honest jobs, jobs where they have to report to stockholders.

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Zbigniew Brzezinski: Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?

Israel is isolating itself. Israel is putting itself in jeopardy. Israel is following exactly the wrong path. So say such assorted "friends" of Israel as Zbigniew Brzezinski, George Soros and J Street. (But, I repeat myself. Soros is J Street.)

But what do our lying eyes tell us as we look around in the midst of this Spring Time for the Arab nations?

Turkey: They repress 20% of their population; namely, the Kurds. And, in pursuit of their indigenous Kurds, they bomb Iraq territory.

Syria: World leaders watch and voice their intimidating "tsk, tsk, tsks" as Assad slaughters non-violent protesters in numbers that now exceed well over a thousand.

Jordan: "Jordan will not become Palestine," proclaims the Hashmenite King as the Palestinian population grows to over 60%.

Libya: So far no anti-Zionism there. Indeed, a group who helped overthrow Qadaffi invited a Jew, formerly of Libya, to return and help them direct their new democracy.

Egypt: The contest between the Egyptian army and the Muslim Brotherhood has still not been resolved.

Iraq: Totally preoccupied with its own problems, which include the struggle for power between the Shiites, the Sunnis, and the Kurds, not to mention the interference of the Iranians.

Saudi Arabia: They would love to have the Israelis drop a bomb on Iran, but only whisper this thought to its close friends, never daring to speak their mind in public. Do they still deny their women the right to drive a car? Do they still abuse their hired help from Bangladesh, the Philippines and elsewhere?

Iran: What is there to say about this country run by pin-headed mullahs? Do they wish to annihilate Israel? Is the Pope Catholic?

Is Israel isolated? As the only decent, rational, and democratic country in the region, you can bet your bottom dollar it is.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Republicans: Their Hearts and Minds

I'd like to write a blog saying who I prefer as the Republican nominee in the 2012 election. But, at this point, that's just not impossible. My heart lies with Rick Perry, but my mind says to go with Romney.

Let me go back in time to the debate between JFK and Nixon. I was driving somewhere on business when I heard the debate on my car radio. Nixon seemed to be the clear winner. I was wrong. Most voters watched the debate on TV. The visuals clearly favored JFK. Even I could see this as I watched reruns of the debate.

Yesterday, as I watched the debate on CNN, I felt that Perry looked better than Romney. He was more macho. That is not to say that Romney didn't look good. He was as handsome as ever, and well prepared for the game. But, trying to imagine how middle America might view the debate, I was guessing that the crowd could favor Perry. (I haven't yet seen any poll results regarding the debate.)

I don't have much use for Ron Paul. That's fine; he doesn't stand a chance of being nominated. As for the others, I like them all. Herman Cain seems quite competent, but I don't think he projects presidentially and stands little chance of getting the nomination. Michele Bachmann would be better than Obama, but just as Obama is too far left for me, Michele is a bit too far right. Santori seems more experienced than Bachmann. But, he's also a bit too far right on social issues. Also, he doesn't generate Bachmann's electricity and hasn't made all that much of a showing it in the polls. Newt Gingrich: I totally love him. I love his ideas. I love his experience. I love how he delivers his message. Regrettably, he has been badly scarred by past political battles. Also, his personal affairs seem to many of my friends as being far too messy. That leaves us with Perry and Romney.

Perry's comments on social security make him appear like Don Quixote battling windmills. But, I do admire the manner in which he has worked with Latinos in Texas. That's a model that would suit America quite well. I also like his love for Israel. My main problem with Perry is that he frightens my many friends here in New York. They see him as an Evangelical. And, while I have great affection for Evangelicals, I believe, if your going to do battle with Obama, you need those liberals who now find themselves in the "independent" column. The independents that I know will vote for Romney, but not for Perry. I think that's unfortunate, but it's reality.

Anyway, I for one, will vote for any Republican chosen by our Convention.

Friday, September 2, 2011

South Africa: Exposed

Strange how events, seemingly unrelated, can suddenly turn a spotlight on a situation that has gone under the public radar for far too long. It is well known that the UN is not a venue where Israel is viewed with favor. (Great understatement.)

With about 50 Islamic nations in the UN, one quickly sees Israel's handicap. Add to that the nations that would like to put their thumb in Uncle Sam's eye; namely, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and the like. For them, Israel provides a convenient surrogate. In other words the odds for Israel getting a fair hearing become even more remote. But there is one more block of nations that seems interested in sticking it to Israel; namely, the nations of the African Union (AU).

A fair number of AU nations are Islamic. So it isn't too hard to figure out where they stand vis a vis Israel. But perhaps the most important AU country, south of Africa's northern tier, is the Republic of South Africa. This nation gained its independence after a grinding battle against Apartheid. And, along with its leader, Nelson Mandela, it became recognized as a nation that had defeated racial discrimination. For this reason, it has, for the longest time, been accepted as a voice for fairness and justice.

It has, however, been cut slack on matters that would have given another country very low grades. The brutal necklacing of her political opponents by Winnie Mandela's gang of youthful hoodlums was judged an aberration. (To his credit, Nelson Mandela divorced her.)
But then the person to whom Mandela passed on the leadership of this country began giving out quack advice on how to cure HIV over the objections of medical authorities. There were other signs too that South Africa still had a ways to go before it could be viewed as a reasonably mature nation. But, little attention was payed by anyone, other than Jews, to the vilification that this young country directed towards the State of Israel.

Now, with the defeat of Col. Muammar Qaddafi, we begin to see how South Africa allowed itself to be prostituted to the will of this sadistic tyrant. Indeed, South Africa stalled as long as was reasonably possible in acknowledging the transfer of power from Qaddafi over to the Libyans who overthrew him. The reason for South Africa's reluctance to recognize the authority of the rebels has become crystal clear. In his drive to make himself the "King of Africa," Qaddafi had spread great sums of oil money around to various African nations. High on his list of nations so favored was South Africa. But now his overthrow has torn the veil off of Qaddafi's payoffs to South African leaders. We can begin to understand the unreasonable enmity of South Africa towards Israel. Hopefully, a new day will begin to dawn on South African-Israeli relations.