Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Obama Joins Hoover's "Success"

Let’s see, if you follow government suggestions, you get paid for it. Buy a home and get $8,000. Trade in a clunker and get $6,500. Just how many people weren’t going to buy without the stimulus? I is kind of hard to say. But the suggestion is there: “Do what the government tells you, and be rewarded.”

The question arises, did this action bring new people into the market or make those wishing to buy a little less hesitant? Probably all that happened is that sales for later in the year were accelerated into now.

Where did the money come from to pay these people who bought a car and a home $12,500? Don’t feel bad, I don’t know either. Let’s face it, crashing an airliner into the world trade center for 90 virgins in the afterlife has the same sort of ring to it, the only drawback to this analogy, is the religious zealot after the fact, is not going to be whining about non delivery of the 90 virgins. You can manipulate people to get a desired reaction, but the expected results don’t necessarily follow.

I remember reading somewhere that: “The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.” Common sense just doesn’t go far now days. I think we need to go back to the days where you had to be a land holder in order to vote, these people have always had a vested interest in the United States.

There comes a point to where thing start to get absurd and I think we are there. The question is out in front of us: "Where are these funds coming from?" Most people in the country could care less, their answer, the funds are coming from the same place they always came from.

This closing picture is not a political statement, but rather a reflection of the times, Herbert Hoover back in history was a success story without a rival in today's world. The trouble is, he was in the wrong place at the right time, and that could be Obama's plight.

Obama may end up taking the blame just like Hoover did.


AIM said...

Appears you were distracted or in a rush. Number of typos in your last post. Good post though.

It is utterly amazing to me what our government is doing to attempt a recovery. The ignorance and desperation is astounding. Last time that government stepped outside of its boundaries and went crazy must've been back in the '30's.

Sort of like a football game where the guys in black and white are jumping into the game to block field goals or intercept a pass.


Anonymous said...

In your last post you responded to those guys with the remark that they were overreacting. Funny you said that because during 1972-1982 I was in my 20's. I traveled, worked jobs, enjoyed my girlfriends, etc. and was oblivious to oil embargo/gas prices, heavy inflation and unemployment, etc. And then in the early 80's when things crashed out I was just recently married, we lived in a little apartment, we worked some jobs, enjoyed the first decade of our marriage, socialized, went on trips, to the movies, etc. Again, totally oblivious to economic conditions. Maybe this will be the same, eh? Or, maybe those were little hiccups and it has been building up to a major projectile vomiting scenario that one can't remain oblivious to and life as we know it may be very different. There are a lot of nasty things on the horizon. I hope I can remain oblivious.

Jim in San Marcos said...


Thanks for pointing that out. I caught three of them.

Poly said...

For somebody who always stated being non-partisan and not focused on politics in general, you sure have become fixated and mad as hell on Obama.

When Bush was bailing out, spending like crazy, fighting foreign wars and issuing rebate checks, I didn't see you post much of anything about that.

It would be nice to see your post far less political (again) and more about the economic policy you feel is contributing or fulfilling your depression calls. Yeah you're mad, so am I, but there are plenty of better political site I could get that information from.

Just my opinion and feedback.

Jim in San Marcos said...

Hi Polly
Your comments surprised me. Obama is a non sequitur.

It is very hard to side step someone that hogs ever bit of publicity that he can get. I’m not against health care reform, but whose plan is it? This guy didn’t write one bit of the legislation, and yet is has his name written all over it. Who does he talk to about getting it passed? You think he would lobby Congress, not jawbone the public.

I think that the man is either very arrogant or incredibly stupid. Most Presidents will guide legislation through Congress with all sorts of deal making. Just putting your name on it severely cuts into your supporting votes and options. Threatening Congress through voter intimidation could backfire on him.

Accusing me of not giving Bush equal time, I would have to agree with. He kept to himself and maintained a low profile.

I do poke fun at Obama, his biography is lackluster. Becoming the first black President is quite an accomplishment, but if you forget that he is black, what has he done? He won a Noble Peace Prize that has mystified the world. People out there think he is going to save the world.

The guy becomes President and it’s as if he thinks no one is listening to what he says—he keeps on repeating the message over and over again. We have to be the stupidest citizens on earth. I understand his health care program and don’t support it. I get the feeling I am being nagged to death over the issue-- give up, so he shuts up.

This man we have elected president is a general with no medals. He struts out on the stage with a plan to fix everything. In my personal opinion, the guy is a joke. It’s just rather unfortunate that the guy wasn’t a Republican (in your case), then my comments would have been OK.

That picture I posted, I thought quite humorous. It was a mock parody on the Saturday Evening Post which ran a Norman Rockwell picture in each issue (a magazine that traveled well during the Great Depression).

Jim in San Marcos said...

Hi Anon 10:54

You have hit the nail on the head. Each of us, according to age, will experience this in different way. If you are young have No Fear. If you are old, don't even trust your dog (just kidding unless you're a Congressman).

Thank you for your comments

Anonymous said...

Attn: Poly and other liberals/socialists

Should Jim hide his eyes and prefer to not discuss the extinction-event asteroid heading straight for Earth?

Ah yes, he should instead focus on the beautiful non-symmetry and orbital grace of the rock as it travels its death-route.

El Scorcho

Anonymous said...

Obama is a cipher. Typical politician on a power ego trip. He doesn't have what it takes to make a difference. He's black... so what. Color is irrelevant. Intelligence, courage, integrity, honesty are relevant.

He turned the whole financial crisis over to CONgress. His administration is filled with all the usual suspects that helped to create our situation in the last few administrations.

Change? Yeah, right. The only change he'll get is a majority of the population walking around in a daze asking "spare change?".

He won't make a second term. He'll be booed out of office because the economy will be in the toilet and he'll still be saying it was Bush's fault.

He really had a chance to do something but he doesn't have what it takes. Meanwhile there will be more debt and deficits and spending in his administration than any in history. Because he went the wrong way.

We need liberal, socialist democrats like we need a hole in the head.

Don't get me wrong. Bush was a creep too. Clinton too. Reagan too. They all helped to crash this country.

Anonymous said...

Hey El Scorcho

You made me laugh again. Great analogy........

rob in ns

Jim in San Marcos said...

Hi Anon 12:53

I think Reagan defines this new era of Presidents. Everyone knew he was a hard ass just from watching his movies (right). Politics is pretty dull stuff, the trouble is, the voter now demands box office appeal.

I don't think we can really complain, the only qualifications to become president, are to be 35 years old and an American born citizen. You need more qualifications than that to sweep the floors where I work.

Reagan did OK so being President can't be too hard.

The only problem I see is that the real issues are being swept under the rug and passed on to future generations.

Anonymous said...


We've been passing our problems on to future generations since we were plowing fields in Mesopotamia.

I have to say Obama is due for criticism because he runs around country and world like a rock star. He's the perfect front for whatever agenda the elite are trying to push on the masses because if backlash to policies is too great then his supporters can always go nuclear and play racism card. We need less government not more to fix problems. Unfortunately looking at line-ups to get H!N! flu shot yesterday(in my town people lined up for 8 hours in cold and it it was about 34 fahrenheit)) people expect the govenment to fix everything. Not a hopeful sign from my perspective.

rob in ns

Poly said...

Sorry Jim, I wasn't disagreeing with your content, you're spot on and I'm mad as hell too. I just simply was trying to state that your posts have become very "personal" and frequently political in nature.
My point regarding Bush (considering he presided for 6 years leading up to the when you even began your blog) was that he contributed towards this depression by a factored of 100 over what Obama has, yet you simply ignored to post about him personally or politically…….simply because he "kept to himself” I was trying to highlight this difference as evidence of how political it has become and was hoping this blog didn't manifest into a welfare loving socialist bash blog.
To October 29, 10:45:00 PM, Sorry to disappoint you, but I’m actually more of a classical liberal. No Jim should certainly not hide his eyes; I was just hoping for less of the ideology and more of what has made this a great blog.

Jim in San Marcos said...

Hi Poly

I glad that we are on the same side of the fence.

I think with Presidents, there is a time lag of 6 to 10 years between what Congress passes and the percieved effects. So if Bush got credit for something, it probably got started under Clintons watch.

I think the people responsible for this mess on are in Congress. Their health and retirment plan demonstrates their "collective creativity" (similar in principle to the "five finger discount").

Anonymous said...

It all goes back much further than that dummies...


dollar not being tied to anything...

government intervention...

government regulation dismantled...

socialism in the form of income tax, soc secur, medicare, etc...

permissiveness and not taking congress people and other govmt officials to task and severely punishing them when they committed acts of corruption, etc...

allowing lobbyists/special interest groups to overwhelm congress en masse and influence them...

a systems that inclines govmt reps to be more concerned about their re-election every few years than the issue and long views (short-termism)...

government interference in business...

fractionalized reserve banking (allowing banks to lend on a 1:12 ration)...

keynesian economics...

dropping production and going from creditor to debtor...

allowing govmt to destroy integrity of dollar with inflation...

drugs and tv...

Jim in San Marcos said...

Hi Anon 6:57

I think you lost whatever audience you had in the first sentence by calling everyone dummies.

The Dale Carnegie course "How to win friends and influence people," might be a course for you to look into.

Tyrone said...

This was an interesting read from John Mauldin. He makes some good points. He never says we won't have massive inflation, but he rules out hyperinflation. So perhaps we'll keep our "precious" dollars; they just won't be worth much.

Catching Argentinian Disease
"Inflation is a monetary phenomenon, as Milton Friedman said. But hyperinflation is always and everywhere a political phenomenon, in the sense that it cannot occur without a fundamental malfunction of a country's political economy."
Ferguson pointed out in the quotes above that hyperinflation is always and everywhere a political decision. Governments have to choose to print money. In theory and in practice, what would happen if the Fed decided to accommodate a politicized US government that wanted to spend money on favorite projects and support groups, maybe even deserving programs like health care or defense or pensions or Social Security? Money they could not borrow?
For the record, I do not think the US will experience hyperinflation as long as the Fed maintains its independence. Read the speeches from various Fed governors and regional presidents. These are strong personalities, and they understand that going down that path ends in massive tears. Bernanke warned just a few weeks ago that the government needs to get serious about the fiscal deficit. Watch the rhetoric from the Fed heat up after his reconfirmation and the confirmation of two new governors in the first quarter.

The Fed has committed to buy a fixed amount of government debt in its quantitative easing program. That commitment will be finished by the end of the first quarter (if I remember correctly). Then comes the tricky part.

AIM said...

Hi Jim,

Isn't it interesting how anomalies form and eventually become the new normal and how we can become so "reasonable" about them?

Think about it...

Government deficits are just accepted. The fact that they continue every year is accepted. The fact that they grow every year is accepted. More amazing, the fact that the government keeps borrowing to pay the annual deficits is accepted. Now we have all of this liquidity moving in... the Fed is beginning to print money on a level that has never existed in the history of this country. Severe monetary inflation is on the way (concurrent with asset deflation). How much of this will be accepted?

If an individual or household or business ever behaved in this manner it would be dead in the water.

A government that stays under budget, has a surplus (enabling taxes to stay low), and fosters productivity is now the anomaly.

America we hardly know ye.


Anonymous said...

Excellent quote from your article - “The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.”

Thanks to the commenter that posted a link to the 'Catching Argentinian Disease' article.

I am a US citizen living in Argentina. Everyday I look at Argentina and see a country that was rich and prosperous two generations ago and overtime became poor as well as powerless on the world stage. Bad fiscal policy and trade imbalances can propel any country, even the US into a pit.


Jim in San Marcos said...

Hi M /\ from Argintina

It is great to have feed back from other countries.

Keep us posted on conditions there.This blog is always open to other commentary from third party sources. Just click on the email link if you have something that would make for a good post.

Thank you for your comments and take care