Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Grumpamoose's Rules for Political Discourse

I have been thinking and mulling over, albeit at a low simmer, about how crazy certain habits of political discourse make me. This has about come to a boil, prompting me to post this now instead of another time. As I am temperamentally suspicious of the motives of governing officials, I will be skewering several Left/Liberal habits, since Liberals favor more and more activist government. And as I am a bipartisan Grumpamoose, there will also be skewering of Conservatives as well. This is not an exhaustive list, just the top 7 or so political things that makes me want to kick my dog and slap my wife. And since I would like to stay married and alive, I need to find another outlet.

So here you go.

#1. Budget Cut = A year over year reduction in the monetary amount allocated to a particular item, agency, or department. If you are going to claim something is a budget cut, (a la Republicans are out to starve Grandma and reduce her Social Security), and this fiscal years budget has more money than the previous one, how in the blue blazes is that a cut? If I budget 20 million for Department X this year, and propose $25 million for 2009, then when I put together the 2009 final budget, Department X gets $22 Million, that is a $2 million budget increase. Everyone who has graduated high school, even as poorly educated as most American high school graduates are, should know the simple concept that $22 million is 2 million than $20 million . and that some numbers are higher than others.

#2. Individuals invest. Private companies invest. Retirement and Pension plans invest. Government does not invest. Investment inherently means choice. I can choose to invest my money for an potentially greater return on that money, or I can choose to go to Papa Johns every week. The bottom line is I choose. When the IRS and state taxing agencies give me the same choice - only then - and not until then - can you truthfully say that Government is an investment.

#3. The Eighties are over - Ronald Reagan is dead. While I personally agree that Ronald Reagan was one of our best Presidents - (and I will mercilessly delete any comments otherwise - this is my blog. Wanna bash Reagan, take it elsewhere) he was not God. He was a mere mortal, and he made policy blunders and occasionally acted on misguided faith in the goodwill of his adversaries, as have all other Presidents and political leaders. The constant refrain since 1988 that so and so is "Reaganesque" or "The Next Ronald Reagan" is insulting to the man and his legacy, and frankly insulting to the intelligence of those forced to listen to such twaddle. News flash - There will never be another Ronald Reagan. He was unique to his time, and in any case the social, political, and economic conditions that made his policy prescriptions the right medicine at the time, are gone too. Hopefully anyway.

#4. The Sixties are also over, and John F Kennedy likewise is no longer with us. See #3 substituting Reagan for Kennedy

#5. What properly constitutes "Middle Class", "The Rich", and "Fair share" must be pre-defined. If you think Middle class ends at $35,000.00 annually, The Rich is everyone with higher incomes, and Fair Share is 50%+, just say so. So I can know if you are a Thief, or just another politician.

#6. When tax rates go up - that is called a tax increase.
Suppose under Presidential X's administration , the rate at which I pay taxes goes down. If President Y champions repealing President X's tax policies, and Congress agrees with President Y, that means I get hit with a tax increase. See rule # 1. Again, 28% is higher that 15%, and 15% is higher than 10%. You are not stupid. Neither am I. Stop acting as if one of is is a moron. I promise you 'taint me.

#7. Finally, when supply is low, and demand is high, prices increase. This is economics 101, again something every American High School graduate should know. It is not a grand conspiracy of the EEEEVVVIIIIILLLL CORPORATIONS!!!!TM.* But since many people apparently don't get this concept, or intentionally don't get it, but that is another rant for another day, let me explain it. When there is less of anything to go around, whether it is gasoline or grapes, it will cost more. The reason that it will cost more is because each individual grape is more valuable. The grapes are more valuable, since there are not enough grapes for all the people who want grapes. Since price is the expression of value, higher value = higher price. Unless enough other folks decide they can live without the grapes they want, and stop demanding grapes, grape prices will continue to go up, unless the grape supply goes up too. Eventually the grape farmers will grow more grapes, to get more money from the higher grape prices. Grape prices then will fall, the farmers won't grow as many grapes the next year, and some of the people who switched to oranges will want to buy grapes again. Rinse and Repeat.

*The only possible exception to this is when supply is artificially restricted because some wealthy elitists want to keep the average Joe out of their neighborhood by land use restrictions. Or because some Congressmen are lobbied (cough ...bribed....cough) to sponsor a bill that mandates increased use of ethanol fuels made from corn, then holds hearings about why food prices are going through the roof.


Mr President said...

All I'm going to say is...