x

Please Login




Register Here!

On Politics, We Can Always See the Whites of Their Eyes.

Login / Register   About Us   Advertise   Contact Us  
RSS Feed

The Patriot Room

Your Ad Here

Bambi's first mistake: He can fix what ails us

by: Clyde   posted: 2009-01-08 15:28:00
Viewed 349 times. 3 Comments.

Bambi said something today that we already knew he thought: Only government can fix what ails us.

What, precisely "ails us"? We have an economic contraction. Contractions are wonderful things. They spawn creative destruction, the very engine of a capitalistic system. Old technology that cannot compete is washed out. Inefficient labor is replaced with new labor processes that are more efficient. Undercapitalized companies either innovate or die. Fat bloated companies either get smart or die. It's the winter that Chancey the Gardener spoke of - we should welcome the cycles; as long as the roots are strong, then new growth comes in the spring.

Everything is measured according to GDP - Gross National Product. GDP is the total value of all goods and services produced by the economy. Yes, there's some twists and turns in the calculation, but we aren't going there. GDP at the end of Calender Year 2008 Quarter 3 was $14.4 trillion.

Our presidents have had vastly different approaches to dealing with the economy. But capitalism is, well, capitalism. So to set the baseline, let's go back to Adam Smith. Here's the quote from which the oft-cited "invisible hand" comes:

Every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.

How can we apply this? No one goes to work for the lowest wage they can achieve - if economic security is their priority. Further, while an individual may work in a lazy fashion, the company wants to put forth the best product that it can. The system is geared towards growth and excellence. In the aggregate, systems naturally cycle as new technology becomes available, new labor practices emerge, and markets either emerge or faded away. Cycles are normal.

So along come presidents with their differing views on how to "manage" the economy. Johnson does his vast social engineering. Nixon introduces wage and price controls, abandonment of the international gold standard, depreciation of the dollar, and deficit spending. Ford brought modest tax cuts and spending restraints. He also sought to "decontrol" energy prices in order to stimulate production. Carter tried (and largely failed) to reform the tax structure, welfare, and health care. Reagan brought supply-side economics with significant tax cuts to free industry. George the Elder lost ground when dems lied to him about spending cuts and tax increases - the economic legacy was basically a clusterfuck. Clinton opened markets with NAFTA and reformed welfare (both pub policies blocked previously); he didn't do much else. George the Younger returned to supply-side economics with a moderate's voice.

Could the philosophies have been much different?

So what did the economy do - GDP - during each of their reigns?

Here is GDP source data 1964 to present. Instead of narrowly looking at quarter to quarter, let's quote the numbers at the beginning of each presidential term (US$Billions):

Johnson CY64Q1 649.6
Nixon CY69Q1 961.0 48% increase
Ford CY74Q3 1,514.2 58% increase
Carter CY77Q1 1,939.3 28% increase
Reagan CY81Q1 3,052.7 57% increase
George the Elder CY89Q1 5,367.1 76% increase
Clinton CY93Q1 6,542.7 22% increase
George the Younger CY01Q1 10,021.5 53% increase
CY08Q3 14,412.8 44% increase

It seems that the economy did what it wanted to do irrespective of the president's policies. Yes, Reagan controlled inflation and unemployment. Yes, recessions and wars are not highlighted. But you cannot point to huge swings in growth or contraction of GDP based upon presidential policy.

So when Bambi says that only the government can fix what ails us, I am compelled to ask - why is this situation so much different than anything else we have faced in the last 45 years? What makes you so special? Never forget, Child in Chief, FDR prolonged the Great Depression by seven years doing just what you are suggesting.

Related Articles


Links to this post

Trackback url: http://patriotroom.com/article/bambi-s-first-mistake-he-can-fix/trackback

Your Ad Here

Comments 3

civis americanus on 2009-01-08 18:47:43

I agree with you completely about FDR prolonging the Great Depression. As to why Bambi thinks he is so special; well, he is such an extreme liberal. Although some of George W's administration seem to have forgotten; true conservatives largely believe in doing nothing through the government that is not mandated by the Constitution. Obama is demonstrating the liberal belief that government can solve everything and lucky us - we are going to be paying (literally) for his attempts to sublimate natural economic cycles. He'll probably create some new ABC-type programs, torment the world's best health-care system, and take the governments new oversight of Detroit to an extreme. All this, when sitting back and letting nature take its course would correct things. Man's inherent nature can not be changed; therefore economic cycles can not be, either. I believe they are one and the same, when you really get down to brass tacks...


Clyde on 2009-01-08 18:53:09

i like the bushes ... but people that call them conservative are just not paying attention. they are both moderates. the problem with johnny mac is that he was even more moderate than W.

we need to find our way back to reagan-style leadership, reagan-style economics. we dealt with unemployment and inflation since lbj got done screwing with the economy. it took reagan to free the economy to fix it itself, and it did.

who's the next true conservative leader for our country?


Evil Monk on 2009-01-09 02:11:28

This would be another good opportunity for the "Darwin Effect" to take place were it not for the meddling from the left.

I guess all I can do is agree here.

Anything else would just be superfluous...


Have an opinion?

 Name (required)
 Email (required)
 Website

If you were a member you wouldn't have to input that stuff!


What is 2 + 3 ? (seriously... for moderates the answer is 4 and for liberals the answer is cat)

Note: Your comment may be held for moderation.

blog advertising is good for you

blog advertising is good for you

Publius' Newsstand

Get Your PR Button!

More Articles By Clyde

Copyright © 2008-2009 Patriot Room Media, LLC
Privacy Policy  Terms Of Service