Bitter Harvest

One of many parts of the budget process left hanging when our legislators ducked out of Washington DC for their ill-conceived summer vacation was passage of the Farm Bill.  Now traditionally, passing a Farm Bill in Congress is never a problem.  Bi-Partisan agreement for them (always a danger sign) has usually been pretty simple to achieve, since in 1973 such bills began combining some of the worst of government handouts.  For the first time however Republicans in the House violated one of those previously unwritten 'I get mine and you get yours' rules in federal budgets by attempting to separate the SNAP program (better known as Food Stamps) from the various subsidy and federally-supported crop insurance programs provided to Agribusiness.  As members traded accusations of waste, fraud, and abuse, it was often difficult to tell where the acrimonious language about corporate subsidies began and rancorous words over starving children ended.   

Now the USDA who's in charge of the money for both programs was justifiably concerned, and has been doing their damnedest to see the money for both programs substantially increase over the years (no doubt thereby increasing their own influence and  power in DC).  They've even gone to the extent of creating literature, programs, and media efforts to sign people up for SNAP (though technically, it's not legal to recruit for SNAP).  With the aid of a number of private groups in recent years (some of whom are receiving other government subsidies) they have in fact been hugely successful in increasing SNAP enrollment from 17 million in 2000 to 45 million in 2011.  The total budget outlay for the program, which once stood at a mere $18 billion in 2000; saw Congressionally approved increases (including one that was a part of the original stimulus program); that have brought it to $72 billion in 2011.  

Not to be left behind in this bi-partisan effort of grabbing what you can, one of the most effective lobbying groups in the country has similarly helped to see crop insurance for farmers, once at $1.5 billion in 2002,  grow to $7.4 billion in 2011.  Even a GOP that has supposedly been taken over by its radical right-wing seems content to leave mandated bio-fuel requirements in place; insuring not only that prices for crops used in their production will remain high, but that their production will be supported by subsidy and insurance programs.  Supposed Free Market advocates in the legislature have likewise retained the crony capitalism of restrictions on things like sugar imports to a mere 15% of the domestic market, while subsidies to sugar producers remain at over $2 billion per year (according to the CATO Institute).

I can hear the cries now however.  "Wait," the populists shout, "there's a difference.  Farmers are just regular, hard-working folks doing a difficult job in tough times.  They're not someone looking for a handout."  Really!  First, let's recognize that regardless of popular myth, we're no longer talking about the gentlemen farmer in agriculture when today 50% of food production comes from the biggest 2% of all farms in the US.  But even if we look at traditional family farms in this country, let's look at how badly those farmers have been doing financially.  Average crop production was up across the country again last year, land values have increased at a double digit rates for the third year in a row, and crop prices look to be up once again in 2013; according to the magazine "The Week".  Farmer income in this country in fact averaged $87,289 in 2011, almost 30 percent higher than that of the average US household income of the same year.       

As for 'hand outs' available for farmers, let's talk a bit about programs begun during the 'Dust Bowl' that were designed to prevent the collapse of agriculture in this country.  Instead of well-intentioned assistance, since the Agricultural Act of 1949 we now 'subsistence farmers' who largely 'subsist' on their checks from the government.  That's the same government which long since made the practice of paying farmers not to farm (a program designed to keep crop prices up) a permanent part of agriculture legislation.  

This means that in the name of caring for 'farmers', typical government program abuse has led us to a point where we send farm subsidy checks to 1,500 residents of New York City (none of whom are not making Salsa to my knowledge) for rural land they own elsewhere.  Extensive efforts by the Just Blowing Smoke Research Department were unable to confirm if any of these same people were simultaneously enrolled in SNAP, but it's possible.  Between the government imposed import controls, crop subsidies, and crop insurance, it would seem difficult if not impossible today not to profit by tilling the fields these days (or not tilling it, as the case might be).

Oh I'm sure that the budget battles will begin again when our esteemed national legislature returns to DC next month.  Congress has shown themselves all but incapable of passing the annual budgets that they're obligated to, relying instead on the magical misdirection of continuing resolutions to promote and prolong partisan bickering for political purposes.  I suspect however, that somewhere amidst the noise and distractions of raising the debt limit and passing that next continuing resolution however, a quiet compromise will be reached with regards to various parts of the Farm Bill.  The seeds of waste, abuse, and corruption were planted long ago in the fields of food production and food assistance.  They've been ably fertilized over the years by lobbyists for Agribusiness and watered by decades of elected officials running for the highest office in the land in early primary states and those who could see no further than the federal funding they could brag about bringing back to their districts.  Considering that sorry state of affairs, it's should therefore be no surprise that we have little more than a bitter harvest to look forward to where the Farm Bill is concerned.

The "Stuck on Stupid" Dictionary #41

The warm weather here at the headquarters of Just Blowing Smoke is evidently working as a tonic for the normally lazy lexicographers of the SOS Dictionary.  (Either that, or they are concerned of being crowded out of their cubbyhole by plethora of suggestions for new entries being received.)   Quite frankly, those in Senior Staff don't really care what the reason is as long as they don't have to continue to make excuses for their lack of control over this normally rogue department.

In spite of this increased literary production however, it seem that there many of you reading this who have somehow managed to miss previous postings on this subject (shame on you, now go back and search all of the postings under the label of  'Dictionary').  For those of you thus unfamiliar, the SOS dictionary is a reference guide to terms which nominally mean something to the rest of the English speaking world, but appears to mean something entirely different when looked at through the jaded eyes and rose colored glasses of the SOS dictionary staff.

Budget:
 
1.  A form of bookkeeping in which estimates of expected income and expense for a given period in the future (usually a year) are entered for a given entity in the form of a fiscal ledger. 

2.  An esoteric form of mathematics more closely related to fiction than to fact (at least in the public sector), though these creative efforts are not eligible for literary award as such.

3.  An advanced form of thievery involving the robbing of Peter (like Capital Improvements) to pay Paul (like the General Fund) which can apparently occur without criminal charges after being approved through voter ignorance.  The ultimate goal of these efforts is to perform the deed in such way that Peter doesn't recognize (or at least complain) that his pocket's been picked and Paul doesn't realize he's been gifted.



Surplus:
 
1.  A term nominally used in bookkeeping to describe an excess of assets over liabilities in a given period.

2.  A term used in public sector bookkeeping more to create a positive political message (especially in election years) than to describe a condition of positive fiscal fact which actually doesn't exist.

3.  A term used in often confusing budgetary processes that inaccurately describes the result in the continuous Robbing of Peter to pay Paul so many times that it effectively renders anything purporting to be the truth as meaningless.

(see Budget)

This Is An Official Statement

"Blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah ...."

That, of course, is what they all seem to sound like these days (remarkably like the adults in a 'Charlie Brown' cartoon, if I do say so).  A representative of the city is standing in behind a podium and in front of a bunch of microphones to tell us that there's a problem, and that the water and sewer system is going to hell.  Oh sure, he knows as well as you do that part of what we've been paying for years was to take care of the upkeep of the system (which evidently no one really bothered to do, in spite of the fact that they told us they were).  That's not important now though.  What's important is that without money, a lot of money, the problem can never be solved. 

No wait, it's a representative of the state telling us that in spite of the fact that we're spending more money per child than we ever have in the nation's history on education, we need to spend much more money for it.  This isn't more money to keep and reward the best teachers, to test more innovative teaching methods, or for technology that might make the process better for teachers and students alike; but only to perpetuate the existing failed practices.  Previous dramatic increases in spending have done nothing to produce students more ready for higher education, increase measurable test results, or even increase general literacy in this country.  Such prior failure however, has nothing to do with the potential of success (no matter how remote it is); but more money it is.  

No, it's a representative of our federal government telling us that in spite of the increasing amount of money that we're spending on the war on poverty, that we're losing the battle.  Not only are we losing however, but according to the government, our investment has led to a situation where things are worse than when we started, and in fact worse than ever before.  In fact, perhaps one of the few successful bits of strategy is that some of the money we're spending has been to recruit new victims to the struggle or to relax the rules so that more than would have in the past will now qualify.  We've been fighting this war for over 50 years now, but instead of it being one that America has long since become tired of funding at previous or existing levels, it's one that our leaders tell us can only be held at a draw (no one even talks about winning it anymore) through ever increasing staffing and budgets.  You've guessed it ... more money from us it is.

Fortunately for you this isn't an official statement, which means that it isn't filled with what one of those once in power in the Glass City used to call "half-truths, mistruths, and outright lies".  That means that you're free to actually pay at least some limited attention to it (well, as much as you normally do with JBS at any rate) without fearing that it's going to cost you any money.  Cause if you're being even minimally honest with yourself, that's what you normally do.  You're tired of hearing the same old crap from the same cast of characters; and knowing that each time they open the pie hole in one of their two faces, someone's going to be reaching into your pocket. 

Like many of you in this economy, I've been forced to recognize that at times I've been a bit wasteful and profligate in my spending.  I always figured that this was money, earned from the sweat of my labors, and I could therefore do whatever I wanted with it.  I never counted on being able to borrow money from friends and relatives in order to fulfill my financial obligations; and in spite of my setbacks, think I can say that what I owe to both is simply my thanks for being supportive when I needed them to (and putting up with me in the first place of course).  And in the process of my minor trials and tribulations, I like to think that I've learned from my mistakes. 

Government at any level however, seems incapable of this last part, and therefore unable to do the same.  There are those at least in government, honest to admit that many of the same programs designed to take care of a problem, though designed and initiated with the best of intents, are full of waste and fraud.  Whether we're talking about the quality of drinking water or that of education, they can point to glaring errors (usually far enough in the past to show that they weren't responsible); and assure you that now that such situations have come to their attention are being seriously looked at.  They can likewise point to serious breaches in the rules and enforcement as part of the bad old days that will go away if new and additional funding is approved.  When was the last time that you heard any of them making a subsequent official statement regarding the progress that's been made, the rules that have been changed to close or even address issues, or the enforcement cases that are being prosecuted against those who have done little more than steal both our trust and our money.

Unfortunately we hear nothing of the kind.  Journalism (especially investigative journalism) has all but disappeared from the airwaves.  Neither the television nor the radio networks (nor the daily newspapers for that matter) can afford the news staffs required to attempt to do what they once considered their moral responsibility.  Instead more often than not, their programs and pages are filled little more than the official statements handed to them by the very corporations and governments that they once attempted to protect us from.  Most of those dedicated to editorializing on paper and television talking heads that are their broadcast counterparts have become willing sycophants to the official blather of the ruling elite in order to keep their 'inside access' to those in power.  This unfortunately, has become a gift that's little more than a parasitic arrangement used by both for feeding off the public.  It doesn't take someone with their tin foil hats slightly askew to believe that the parasites like it this way, since when you've tuned them out, they can do damned near anything they like to you.  After all, they've more than adequately informed you about it by issuing an official statement.

So before ending this I'd like to issue an official statement of my own:

"We regret that Just Blowing Smoke has done so few posts in the last couple of weeks.  Technical issues, in conjunction with a mild case of creative blockage and a healthy dose of pure laziness might normally have been considered the root of the problem.  In reality however, the sole responsibility for this has been a lack of government funding.

Since no government in their right mind is likely to change this situation, we at JBS will have to do our best to pull ourselves up by our collective bootstraps and return to doing a better job."

We apologize for the inconvenience, and now return you to reruns of Honey Boo Boo ...    

TFP Column: Does Size Matter

Governor Snyder is getting ready to name someone to take over the financial affairs of Detroit, since they've managed their money so badly that they're $20 billion in debt.  California and Illinois are sinking financially like they've struck an iceberg, and the country as a whole is likely to reach a $20 trillion deficit before the current occupant of the White House leaves it in four years.

All of this got me thinking about when and whether these larger government designations might also be thinking about the appointment of someone to more effectively watch they budgets.  I also wondered whether it would even be legal for them to do so.  All of this thinking and wondering led to some writing, in the form "Does Size Matter?" for the TFP website.

Fortunately for me, the TFP is in far better financial shape than any of these governments entities, so when you click on the enclosed link, you will be able to read this effort.  Even more fortunate is that having read it, you can then move on to all the information available to keep you up-to-date with NW Ohio and the Glass City.

So as this first full week of March comes about, don't forget to spend a bit of time with both the mid-week Star Edition and the regular weekend Edition of the largest Sunday circulation newspaper not only in Toledo, but in Lucas Country as well.  And if that weren't enough, you'll also be able to read Ohio's Best weekly newspaper for the last four years (at least according to the Ohio Society for Professional Journalism), the Toledo Free Press.

 

TFP Column: Wasn't It The Economy Dummy?

It occurred to me that after arguing about the economy for most of the 2012 election season (you know, about 1000 years), the subject had all but disappeared from the national radar screen.  Strangely in fact, after ever more promises that it was time to make jobs number one, the president sent home his Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

So it seemed only fitting that once more the Commander in Chief failed to submit his budget to Congress on time and asked Congress to kick the can of Sequestration further down the road so that we can talk about gun control and comprehensive immigration reform, that someone needed to write, "Wasn't It The Economy Dummy?".  

After all, the Senate hasn't passed a budget since April of 2009, the unemployment rate is still at an unacceptable high, and the only part of the economy that's growing is the deficit.  After all the hype in 2012 about creating more wealth in this country (mostly, it appears, so we can tax it), nobody seems to be doing anything about it.

It's only the middle of the week however, and that makes this a week where there's much more to come.  The TFP Star edition is only now hitting the streets and we're still days away from a weekend with Toledo's largest Sunday circulation and Ohio's best weekly newspaper ... the Toledo Free Press.

TFP column: You Have to Try

After taking some required time off to rest and recover after Holiday duties, I am once more entering the fray.  It was interesting in "You Just Have to Try" for the TFP to compare what looks to some pointless trench warfare that's about to begin in Congress with the Debt Ceiling and Budget Battle ahead in 2013 with the fiscal battles that Toledo faces as well in its annual budget with the addition of Shaun Enright to replace Phil Copeland (whose leaving for his new job in the County Recorder's Office).  

I fully expect that we'll see little in the coming from the 'No Man's Land' of Washington DC; with few paying more than lip service to finding common ground, and even less proposing real cuts to budget more bloated than a bloated whale on a Malibu beach.  

With yet another in Toledo's City Council representing 'union interests' in this local legislature (something which I wish I could say was severely under-represented without lying).  I believe that here too we can expect an abundance of SSDD, with some creative fiction holding the 'balanced' budget together long enough to raid the Capital Improvement Budget to actually balance it.  (And if anyone should know about 'unbalanced', it's me.)  

On the other hand, everything in this weekends edition promises to be far more balanced, with the exception of the scale that Editor-in-Chief Michael Miller is using.  Michael's weight may be the only thing on the planet going down faster than the national debt is going up.

So my advice would be to spend a bit of the weekend maintaining your own balance by some time with Toledo's largest Sunday circulation and and Ohio's Best Weekly newspaper for the last four years, the Toledo Free Press.  

Fiscal Cliff ... Phoooey

(Please be aware that the occasional use of sarcasm is likely in this effort.  While I can promise you that it's there, I feel no obligation to specifically point out its use.)

The end of 2012 is almost upon us, and quite frankly there's not much to look forward to. After all, we're just about to see the last date with the same numbers that we're ever going to in our lifetimes (12-12-12).  And if that weren't depressing enough, I just discovered that we won't actually have Dick Clark this year to host "Dick Clark's New Years Rockin' Eve" from Times Square.  I mean sure, he's got a great excuse and all, having achieved room temperature in April; but I'm not sure that gives him the right to mess up a show that still has his name on it.  Now there's nothing to look forward from this mostly awful 'Made-for-TV' event than Ryan Seacrest and a bunch of mostly talentless performers (which actually sounds like an episode of American Idol, but that's another story).

So what do have we got to look forward to.  New Year's Eve is a Monday (not one of your prime drinking days), which probably leads to a mid-week hangover for those who insist on over-indulging despite the poor timing. Then there's a couple of weeks of screwed up checks (at least for those of us who don't pay all of our bills electronically), with the scribbled out corrections of the date, shrugs, and occasional apologies to clerks and grocery check out people who don't give a crap anyway.  Oh yeah, and then there's this pesky Fiscal Cliff thing.  I mean wow, what a fuss!

I suppose I don't want to give more to the government in taxes than the next guy (well, maybe except for that Warren Buffet character), but I figure that if any of us has to pay more, all of us should.  I mean hell, Democrats have been telling us for years that things haven't been the same since Bill Clinton was president anyway (and certainly they wouldn't lie about such a thing).  So being a big fan of "The Good Old Days", I say that we all ought to climb in the 'Wayback Machine' and take a trip back to the Magical tax rates of the 90's.  Of course I'd like to take government spending levels back to the same period as those tax rates, but that's just the kind of nostalgia fan I am.

I'm also a realist however, so I know that the government needs to take more of my money.  After all, without it how could they afford all the hiring that they've been up to again lately? (How else are they going to get the unemployment rate down?)  If not for government, who else could be counted to funnel money into solar energy companies that, when they're not shifting their manufacturing to China, are going bankrupt and sticking us for the money they the got from the feds?  How else could the government afford to pay farmers for crops they aren't growing?  Who else could continue to pay ethanol producers to make a fuel that still isn't affordable (even with the federal subsidies), causes more pollution in its production than the gasoline it replaces, wrecks the cars that attempt to use it, and drives up the price of the crops that the farmers do plant since they're being put in a gas tank instead of someone's pie hole.  Hell, they've got the system so well rigged that they can drive up the price of the fuel by forcing the mandatory use of ethanol, drive up the price of groceries being made with whatever's left; and ignore what it does to the cost of living, since neither fuel nor food count when the government calculates this rather vital number.   

But let's get past the nonsense of government's sad attempts to pick winners and losers in the game of capitalism. (Not that with their record, winners comes up often or that anyone's going to let them pick horses at the track because of their past performance ).  The US government has long sponsored pure science as well as commercial opportunities.  Oh sure, we've abandoned spending most of cash we once put in our space program, and NASA with it; but there's still a lot going on in important pure research.  For example, how else than by spending $3 million would we know how far a shrimp can run on a treadmill, or through a $300K grant learn how humans ride bikes?  (Personally, will all those legs I'd like to see a study with the shrimp on the bikes, but that's just how an inquiring mind like mine works.)  How about the $3 million given to the University of CA at Irvine to play video games, the $700K in government grants the University of New Hampshire is using to study methane emissions from dairy cows, or the $615K in taxpayer funding the University of CA at Santa Cruz got to digitize Grateful Dead T-shirts, tickets, and T-shirts?  Oh but there's more!  There's the $1 million in federal funds used to create poetry to raise environment awareness at the Little Rock, New Orleans, Milwaukee, and Chicago Zoos, or the $442K that the NIH is using to study male prostitutes in Viet Nam to name of few of the thousands in recent budgets.

And of course the government needs money to pay the 535 legislators that approve all of this money being spent on such worthy efforts in the first place.  House Speaker John Boehner's making $223K, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's right behind by pulling down a little over $193K, and all the rank (pun intended) and file legislators are knocking back $174K.  (And boy, they're worth it, aren't they?)  How can we expect to be able to afford such high-priced talent if we all don't redistribute a little wealth to those that are making far more than the rest of us (but just under the $250K line used to designate 'the two percent')?  And now that so many of them are retiring because of the toxic atmosphere they've created in Washington DC, there's some pretty fat pensions that have to paid to those who've made millions trading on the inside legislative and regulatory information they've gathered while in office.

So I say Phoooey to the current nonsense and worry being spewed about driving off the Fiscal Cliff in 2013.  I say that when we see that cliff, let's punch the gas and make a Dukes of Hazard, General Lee effort at the jump!  It's time to stand up and be counted for a government that's doesn't appear to be doing so well in the polls and fro some reason seems a bit short of cash. This is the Christmas season after all and our government needs us.  (Oops, did I just violate Jefferson's principle of the 'Separation of Church and State' by mentioning a religious holiday and government in the same sentence?  Sorry ....)  I say we all show the spirit of giving that Americans are famous for (even evil Republicans) and put some of that money we were going to use for holiday charitable donations (no doubt for no better reason than so we could write them off our taxes) and presents for the kids and put it instead where it can do the most good; in the hands of our trusted and respected politicians.  After all, who better than they would know what's best for us.  Besides, with just a little bit of luck, they might give a little bit of it back to us.  
  
             

TFP Column: Not Sherwood Forest, Camelot

This is one of those rare weeks when TFP Editor-in-Chief Michael Miller has apparently lost his mind.  Not content to let me shake up his world with "The EPA is Starving People" earlier in the week, he's now allowed me yet a second disturbing effort in the TFP, "Not Sherwood Forest, Camelot".  

This non-controversial and non-confrontational piece (well, I think so anyway) takes a look at the current presidential offerings of 'Romney Hood' and 'Obamaloney' with what has long been described as the 'Second Camelot' of William Jefferson Clinton. Clinton, you might remember is the last President, Democrat or Republican, to operate with a budget surplus.

But I don't want to burden you here with a surplus of introduction.  I'd rather have you spend the time going to the website of Toledo's largest Sunday circulation, and Ohio's Best Weekly Newspaper for the last three years, the Toledo Free Press.

TFP Column: Titanic Proportions

I truly intended to get a mid-week posting up on time this week; but the more I worked on the effort, the more it became apparent that the effort fit more with the TFP than with JBS. (I will still do a mid-week effort, but it may be a day late ... or so.)

With that in mind, I turned this effort over to Editor-in-Chief Michael Miller (who's work on the upcoming Titanic event in fact instigated this week's column).  Michael, kind soul that he is and ever willing to attempt to save a drowning man a lifesaver (cherry, my favorite) agreed to publish "Titanic Proportions" on the website.  While the piece is not about my ongoing battle of the bulge, you might find it interesting as exercise in tying two things together that shouldn't normally find themselves in close proximity (you know, like steamships and icebergs).  

Since this is happening in the middle of the week, you will find it while reading the mid-week Star Edition on the website; but I'm sure that there will be even more promising efforts there as well in the weekend edition of that which remains the largest Sunday circulation newspaper in Toledo, and Ohio's Best Weekly Newspaper for the third year in a row, the Toledo Free Press.

TFP Column: Red Light Cameras Are All Wet

For years we heard from the city that it installed red light cameras at intersections in Toledo not to make money, but to promote public safety.  While statistics gathered in other cities said otherwise and questions continued to surface about the ‘presumption of guilt' that was used in processing these offenses, the Glass City’s leaders insisted that this was not in fact a “red light scofflaw tax”.

In a stunning reversal the city’s Finance Director, Patrick Mclean this week declared just the opposite, talking about adding to the city’s electronic intersection guardians as a way to supplement funds for youth recreation programs like the city’s pools.  It seemed therefore appropriate that the topic of this week’s effort for the Toledo Free Press would be “Red Light Cameras Are All Wet”.

In it, I give some of the safety statistics now abandoned, as well as the city's ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’ concept of financial planning a bit of airing out.  I even manage to do so before City Council takes its vote on it this afternoon.

Being as early in the week as it is, there will be much more going on in the Glass City this week however.  Issues that will best be covered in both the TFP mid-week Star edition, as well as this weekend’s edition of Toledo’s largest Sunday circulation and Ohio’s best weekly newspaper (3 years in a row), the Toledo Free Press.

Republicans Aren't Perfect

.
Upon reading the title of this piece, there may be some of you out there that are shocked, either by seeing such an admission in Just Blowing Smoke, or that I could even conceive of such a thing, let alone write it.  Others of you who occasionally visit this site (or who have a number of assumptions about it), may only disagree with me in part; believing that they are in fact perfect: perfectly heartless, perfectly soulless, and perhaps even perfectly evil.  Those of you who regularly visit the site however, will have previously noted that I am more than willing to take shots at any political party when the cause and need arise.  Such is in fact the case today.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I must confess that I am not in fact a Republican, but a registered Libertarian.  In my rather long voting history, I can affirm that I started out as a Chicago Democrat (a shameful confession, I admit), and became a Republican for some years before becoming finally and fully enlightened. 

The situation of which I speak of course, is the current debate over the payroll tax deal.  Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those who's about to go all mushy and talk about the spirit of compromise while beating my breast over John Boehner and House Republican's unwillingness to vote on the Senate proposal.  In fact, just the opposite.  I think it's high time that the House threw the whole thing back in the Senate's face.  

How did political discussion in this country reach a point where standing on principle makes you intransigent?  When did having principles that you were willing to fight for make you the lunatic fringe (and you Tea Party members, God love you, know who I'm talking about)?  When did compromise mean that Republicans must give way to the desires of Democrats, but Democrats need not give anything to Republicans in return?  Why is the House the will of the people when controlled by Democrats and an obstructionist and unruly mob when controlled by Republicans?

(As a side note, when did spending 'cuts' become reduction in the increase of such behavior?  When did government begin to accept the concept of 'Wimpy Economics' where tax increases occur immediately, but spending cuts, such as they are, can be deferred to a later date which never actually comes; only to later become forgotten promises by the same politicians who promised fiscal responsibility when looking for votes?) 

How is it that Republicans (who I admit again, aren't perfect) are held as irresponsible for not voting on the Senate Democratic bill, when those Democrats are not in turn held accountable for not voting on a bill previously passed in the House (whether by Republicans or on a bi-partisan basis)?  Why isn't the 'Democratically controlled' Senate being castigated for taking their vote and then ducking out of town, throwing compromise to the wind in the spirit of 'my way of the highway'?  Why isn't the President and media complaining about the Senate one again ducking their budgetary responsibilities (it has after all been over 900 days since they passed a budget) and attempting to kick the can down the road once more?  When did national tax policy become something that required bi-monthly approval?  What can businesses to do in the way of long-term planning (let alone hiring) when so much uncertainty looms, with 2012 being an election year that promises only more of the same, and with the taxation and spending policies of this government being announced as the chosen battlefield?

Don't get me wrong.  I know that these are a lot of uncomfortable questions for many these days; but perhaps it's time someone asked them (the media certainly won't).  The nation is tired of seeing economic policy in this country treated like an empty can of beans (which Congress seems all too full of) being used in a child's game.  It's tired of elected officials shirking the responsibilities that they are paid very well for in the pursuit of keeping the job that they apparently seem incapable of performing.  It's tired of politicians and pundits demonizing business leaders who could be creating jobs in this country, if those in elected office could only provide them with some 'Insider Information' (you know, like businesses give members of Congress) so that they could find a way to cash in on the future and get the economy jump-started.

Wait, I seem to have gotten off track here.  Where was I?  Oh yeah, I started this whole thing by talking about how Republicans aren't perfect ... and they're not.  I have little doubt that under the pressure of the President's bully pulpit and the media's willing cooperation, they will once again cave in on a proposal of their own which did little or nothing, in favor of one proposed by Senate Democrats that does even less.  Displaying the type of fortitude that normally requires a visit to the Invertebrate section of a museum to find, they will fold faster and easier that the paper used for Christmas presents; and the whole pointless disagreement can begin again in time for the next holiday ... Valentine's Day.

Now I don't expect perfection from Republicans (and I expect even less from Democrats under Harry Reid), but I wish that someday they would at least aspire to be more than they are today.  At some point they must learn not to always be the first one to blink in this game of political chicken.  Yes I know that Republicans aren't perfect, but they would be vastly improved by hiring a half decent media consultant / press secretary, getting a spinal transplant, and agreeing to an injection that would help them grow a pair.

.

TFP Column: Economic Holiday Fat

Stepping up on the bathroom scale and listening to Toledo's Administration and City Council begin talking about the city's budget are both things which are becoming increasingly difficult to do.  

As I point out in this week's effort for the TFP, "Economic Holiday Fat", both appear to be subjects filled with temptation, self-delusion as to the facts, and the perpetration unhealthy practices.  While I however, am only playing Russian roulette with my own future health and well-being by recent lack of rectitude, they are gambling with that of a large number of people who have placed them in a position of trust and responsibility.

It's not bragging to say that I am far more sure of my own ability to get out of control consumption under control than I am of those in charge of the Glass City, based on their prior track record.  

But there's also good news to be had as this holiday season kicks into full swing, much of which you will never know about unless you read this weekend's edition of Toledo's largest Sunday circulation and for the third year in a row, Best Weekly newspaper, the Toledo Free Press.

.    

Days of Bread, Circuses, and the Budget Supercommittee

 .
For those of you who didn't pay attention in ancient history class, let me be the first (OK then, the second) to let you know that the Roman Empire was not in fact brought down by the barbarian hordes  (or even the World of Warcraft Horde for that matter).  In fact the Roman Empire had already brought itself down, its moral and intellectual foundation having so crumbled that the first strong wind would bring it down.  It was there waiting for a tipping point, when a group of people who had once been in the service of the Empire, had the vitality and the drive that Romans once had, and were willing to earn what they needed to keep from starving (by fighting if necessary), reached the center of this empire to pick at the remains of the carcass that was once the greatness of Rome.

That greatness began to fade when the politicians (in this case the Emperor and Senate), continued to try to maintain power by giving the citizens what later became known as 'bread & circuses'.  It was Government at that point, that provided food made from the grain confiscated (taxed) from subjugated lands and peoples, and entertainment to keep them distracted from how bad things had actually become and unaware of the storm growing around them. 

Like many throughout history, the Romans soon enough discovered that the strength required to maintain an empire exacted far more than gaining it. They also learned the tragic lesson of empire that eventually the producers begin to resent those living off their labor, a resentment which will sooner or later boil over.  Unfortunately for most empires, by the time they realize these facts, they also realize that once you give citizens something that they have not earned for themselves, it's ever more difficult to withdraw it and stay in power.   Like every government before and since, they failed to learn the lesson of history that 'there's no such thing as a free lunch'; and that eventually all things must be paid for. (Of course this is a much simplified version of ancient history, but one with no factual errors that should stand up to fairly close scrutiny.)

Step forward some 15-18 centuries (depending on where you wish to begin the fall of Rome), and view now the 'empire' of the United States. (Anyone who says it's not an empire is kidding themselves. But look at a map of the location of these united 'States', and the 'territorial possessions' of this country and make your best case.)  We too are seeing our 'bread and circuses' in the form of entitlement programs handed out by a ruling elite to a common man.  (I make no comment here about the desirability of such entitlement programs, but many will be able to draw the comparisons.)

Now we see a nation just passed the $15,000,000,000,000 mark in national debt (and yes, that's 15 trillion and those are 12 zeroes).  The nation is functionally bankrupt, except for its ability to print money and functionally reduce the 'value' of the debt owed.  The upper house of Congress, the Senate, controlled by Democrats since 2007, has failed to pass a budget (good, bad, or indifferent) since April of 2009.  The House of Representatives (or lower house) , controlled by Democrats from 2007-2011 and by Republicans from early 2011 to the present, has recently passed budgets, but ones which they knew would never pass in the Senate.

In the most recent 'kick the can down the road' confrontation, the two parties once again managed to accomplish next to nothing.  No agreement to cut spending (or even significantly reduce the automatic annual increases in spending was achieved). Neither was any realistic look to increasing revenues as an offset made by closing some of the gaping loopholes in the tax code that they themselves had previously created under pressure from lobbyists and well-to-do contributing constituents.  Instead they managed to defer the jobs for which they were hired and sent to Washington for (regardless of party) to a 'Super Committee' which would, because of its smaller numbers, supposedly be able to do the heavy lifting that this larger and politically fractious group of apparent Statesmen could not.  

Not surprisingly, since most of those appointed by both parties were firmly entrenched in the political posturing of their masters, this so-called 'Super Committee also failed in its task; a failure which supposedly will lead to drastic and unsupportable cuts in the government across the board, to the tune of $1.5 trillion over 10 years.  Setting aside the trivial number involved, considering the size of the government budget and that of the debt, we find that most of these cuts are a twisted form of "Wimpy Economics" at best, where cuts are made tomorrow for tax increases imposed today.  Any actual cutting however, is usually pushed out far enough that by the time it's must be done, no one remembers it's there; making it easy for those in power to conveniently forget about it and never make the cuts.

But this is OK, according to those in power, because it allows the politicians to enter the 2012 election year with clean hands and not being directly responsible for either the raising of taxes on those contributing to campaigns (or many of those voting).  Neither are they responsible for any cutting part of the unsustainable entitlement funding that many of those not paying much in the way of taxes (also a significant voting bloc) have come to count on as part of their fair share.

Congress and the Super Committee have once again provided us a valuable lesson in ancient history, and as we see them continue to provide the modern form of 'bread and circuses' we cannot help but wonder if it will turn out better for us than it did for the Romans.  I doubt it ....
 

Ideological Inconsistency

.
I am becoming increasingly frustrated by what is apparently the most widespread epidemic in the world today, ideological inconsistency.  From the pundits to the electorate, few have managed to escape a malady afflicting the nation.  While I don't consider myself above occasional bouts that must be treated, I do try however to give myself regular inoculations of the cold, hard facts in a largely successful prophylactic effort.  Perhaps that's why the dissonance of arguments on both the left and the right seem so confusing to me these days.

Conservatives want to remove subsidies from farmers (something long overdue), solar and wind technology, and ethanol producers.  They claim that industries and technologies that are marketable do not require government assistance in order to survive.  How then do we explain the inconsistency to their wanting to continue subsidies to oil companies and defense contractors?  Is the oil industry not profitable without government assistance?  If such assistance were removed, would they not maintain their profit margins through the market?  And how much has been and is still being poured into corporations developing technologies that this country will never deploy in its own defense?  How much treasure is wasted in contractor malfeasance and featherbedding for projects woefully behind schedule or those that will never succeed?  

Progressives for their part, want to pull the financial plug on any form of energy coming from oil and coal which are already in place and generating inexpensive power much needed for potential economic growth; leaving in place supports for energy sources that will never be more than marginal ones incapable of supplying current, let alone future needs, in anything like their present form.  They somehow manage to forget fact that according to their ideology, subsidizing corporations is inherently evil (especially when any of their manufacturing is done overseas), apparently capable of setting aside such ideology in the name of 'green technology'.  Ideology likewise seems irrelevant when it's pointed out that ethanol produces more pollution (and less energy) than oil; or the concept that while mercury pollution produced by the burning of coal is unforgivable, that released when an energy-saving light bulb is broken is OK.

Meanwhile Congress continues pointless ideological discussions of how to cut the growth of spending in the future instead of the actual spending in the present that's behind our runaway debt. In a perfect example of conflicted dogma, the left and right simultaneously debate how to raise revenue (taxes) without raising taxes (except on those paying most of them already).  Naively believing that this time they can tax the hideously rich (some of whom are already in Congress) without having them lobby their way around it or move their money out of the US to avoid such taxation entirely (and further hurting the economy); they ignore the elephant in the room that even if they were capable of such a monumental feat of legislative legerdemain, the sum taken in wouldn't come close to balancing the government's books (paying 1-2% of the current deficit by most respected estimates).

While they wrestle with this insubstantial demon, the unmistakable monster of government bureaucracy before them continues its reign of terror, absorbing more money and power with each passing moment.  In this government-approved version of "Oliver Twist", the young orphan attacks the grown-ups with his plate, and beats them about the head and ears while taking whatever he determines is his fair share. Ideologically weak legislators on both sides of the aisle, intimidated by this unruly juvenile delinquent, seem unwilling or unable to curb his monstrous appetite; nor can they deny him the increasing authority he takes without asking.  Regardless of Ideology, everything be damned when the business of 'government as usual' is at stake for these unelected courtiers of an increasingly corrupt system.

And of course what discussion of distorted and duplicitous ideology would be complete without touching on the choosing of a Republican challenger for the sitting President that's so much in the news and on the minds of 'those who know'.  USA Today for example, talks recently about non-candidate Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey never entering the race as a governor who after all, "has held office for less than two years" (a crime that they consider Sarah Palin equally guilty of).  True enough as far as it goes, unless one wishes to look at the time before Christie entered office, when in 2008 we elected a junior Senator from Illinois with 'less than two years experience' (and who spent most of that time campaigning for the office he currently holds), to the highest office in the land .

Not to be left out on capricious and incoherent thinking, those on the right still talk about a movement to draft this man of relative inexperience during the national convention where they hope to pick a replacement for one that they complain does not have a proper background and experience of leadership required to perform this function.  

Herman Cain is likewise attacked for a lack of experience from the left and the right, but no one asks whether the experience of running a profitable business is better that of leading an unprofitable government, or why the experience of being a professional politician is a good in and of itself.  We've had experienced politicians in the White House much of the 20th and 21st Century after all, and what have they gotten us except into the mess we now find ourselves desperately seeking a way out of.

Strangely, the only candidate with a consistent ideology is the one most disregarded and demonized.  One cannot help but wonder that if consistent ideology is sought by Republicans, what clearer choice could they have?  Who has more knowledge of what caused the financial disaster we stand on the brink of or spoken more clearly on its solutions?  Who has likewise spoken more often and plainly on a return to a Constitutionally limited government that so many claim as their ideology? 

Instead of praise for such ideological purity however, Paul has been marginalized.  In spite of the fact that he has more experience at working with Democrats and Republicans alike in Congress than any of his counterparts, he's seen as unable to do so.  In spite of apparently standing for exactly what the Republican electorate claims they want from the next candidate for the highest office in the land, the argument continues to be over which of the other candidates is the most electable lesser of evils.  

Like Alice down the rabbit hole, the whole concept of consistent ideology has become 'curiouser and curiouser'.  At a time when we most need an outlook based on an objective analysis of the facts before us, what we get is anything but. The facts today don't seem to count except in how they are capable of being edited into soundbites that fit a pre-existing ideological vision more twisted than the Red Queen. We've so lost sight of what it means to hold firm to anything like the tenets of a consistent personal philosophy that we may soon use H G Wells instead of Charles Dodgson to say that, 'in this country of the blind, the one-eyed man will soon be forced to have government mandated and paid for Lasix surgery'. 

.

Wait Til Next Year

Well the debate over the debt ceiling is over, and the pundits are circling the corpse, hoping to grab one last juicy meal and perhaps take a dump on those they disparage before the entire thing become indigestible. (In case they were wondering, it long since has.)

And while these 'experts' hold forth on who won and who lost, and political opponents use the latest terms of rhetorical abuse on each other; let me put my two cents in. We lost!

In yet another sad example of what passes for leadership in Washington DC, the compromise reached allows the government to borrow more immediately with a promise to cut spending at some future date (probably never). Also in this rather vague future will be yet another commission (now coming to be known as the 'Super Congress') to analyze spending and revenue (taxes) in the hopes of approaching some level of fiscal sanity.

Of course none of what's proposed is or ever will actually be a spending cut, but instead merely a reduction in the expansion that naturally takes place each year with the federal budget. In a process known as 'baseline budgeting', such increases are part of the rules used to provide legislators political cover for the expansion of government (kind of like the rules that hide pay increases for members of Congress) and give it the impression of fiscal responsibility. As a lifelong Cubs fan, this kind of subterfuge reminds me of every baseball season that I have experienced since my birth. Those of us supporting Chicago's North Side team understand what real Conservatives across the country are now gaining great insight into; discovering that they were backing teams with players that should never have been brought up from the minors, dealing with athletes who failed to produce when put into the starting line up, and suffering under managers who can't seem to effectively use the available talent that they can put on the field. In a broken record of incompetence, futility, and failure; every major policy debate in this country looks like a season of baseball in Wrigley Field that goes through the same sorry process as every one before.

The whole thing begins with such promise of course. Expectations of victory are raised, promises are made, and predictions are issued as to the outcome of the season. Early successes often buoy spirits and bring supporters to their feet, but sooner or later the cracks in the lineup begin to appear. An ace pitching staff now seems incapable of throwing a pitch (an idea) over the plate, consistent sluggers start fanning at easy pitches or swinging at balls out of the strike zone, smart base runners stumble and come up short of the bag after getting a great jump, and sure-handed fielders seem to drop every ball (question) sent in their direction by opponents or the media.

Determined not to allow dejection (or reality) set in, Cubs fans (and voters) set aside these minor setbacks; sure in the knowledge that the team will come back and the early promise of triumph will be realized. No matter how horribly each opportunity to win is passed up or squandered, the people in the stands continue to cheer. In true Cubs fan fashion, past mistakes and disappointments are forgotten and yet another chance is granted ... only to be rewarded with disenchantment and disappointment.

The Cubs are currently 15-1/2 games out of first in their division (groan), but real Cub fans will never let such facts dampen their ardor, nor will consistent disappointment (for over 100 years) dissuade them from the hope of victory some day. Strangely enough the losing seems to do nothing more than bring out renewed hope for a brighter future. Failure in the past (even consistent, mind-numbing, soul-stealing failure) cannot and will not be seen as a prediction of future performance. In politics lately, we Conservatives see much the same thing. Sure we lost the game on TARP, on Obamacare, on the Budget, and now on the the Debt Ceiling; but have no fear, there will be another chance for legislators to disappoint us and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory when the next major government debate comes before them. No matter how horribly this team fails to meet expectations however, most of us will remain optimistic. Sure we didn't win this one (or the one before, or the one before that), but wait til next year.

Curious By Its Absence

The debate over raising the debt ceiling rages on and my patience is about at an end, but apparently I'm not the only one. According to the story in the Kansas City Star this morning the president, "demanded that Congressional leaders come to the White House this morning". 

It appears that the leader of the free world is a little peeved that that this problem is not going away in spite of the fact that he has called his political opponents names, castigated both parties in Congress in front of media microphones, and explained his willingness to compromise on everything but the things he's not willing to compromise on (in between fundraisers and rounds of golf). There are a couple of things however that seem curious by their absence: 

1. A plan put forward by the President himself. Oh I know he has delivered an outline, some notes, and a number of suggestions; but I for one have never seen or heard of an actual plan. Neither has he addressed in any meaningful way, a path to reversing the trend of government spending more than it takes in. He, those in the Senate, and much of the mainstream media seem to forget that the reason that we need to raise the Debt Ceiling Limit is that government is spending much more than it receives. No amount of taxation, even if agreed to, is going to solve that problem; and the sooner all the parties involved understand that, the sooner a real solution can be reached. Because words do mean things and since, at least according to Dictionary .com, Compromise means: "a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc. ..." it would seem that in order to reach any meaningful compromise on such 'plans', fully fleshed out ones by both sides would be required. 

2. Absent from these discussions as well is Harry Reid and the Senate. This is not to say that the Senate Majority Leader is invisible, in fact far from it. It's difficult to turn on a TV news broadcast without seeing the Senator from Nevada attempting to strike a pose while delivering strident oratory (mostly vitriolic) about the intransigence of others. Here's what we don't see from Harry and his colleagues however, a plan of their own or a straight up or down vote on anything that the House has proposed. The man who often called Republicans "the party of no" has yet to put forward a budget alternative himself, while allowing no straight up or down vote on House proposals including the 'Ryan Budget' and the recent 'Cut, Cap, and Balance' proposal. 

In fact, for those of you who haven't been paying attention, the Senate has not proposed a budget in over 800 days. Interestingly enough, Senator Reid is not mentioned in the story demanding the appearance of legislators in the White House today. (Evidently he is busy standing on the curb in front of the Senate and barking at cars as they drive by.) With the apparent inability of the Senate to propose or vote on anything concrete in the way of the national budget however, it would seem that he should be the first one called in to the White House and called on the carpet (unless of course, he already simply following the marching orders of the President). 

One has to wonder in fact if the President is seeking to make the position of Senate Majority Leader irrelevant, or if he thinks Sen Reid is incapable of adding anything to the discussion. Perhaps the problem is that after sending out this 'attack poodle' to yip and the crowd and bite a few ankles, the President simply doesn't think that anyone will want to deal with him on substantive issues. So be careful as you watch the weekend's coverage of this pathetic dance marathon. While the mainstream media seems content to highlight the vitriol, acrimony, and unmitigated nonsense of these discussions, those of us out here in 'fly-over country' need to take note of what can actually be seen ... and what's curious by its absence.  

On a more personal note, if you're out there Maureen ... Happy Tweener!

 

TFP Column: More or Less

There appears to be a fundamental question that hangs over the discussions going on in Washington that must be completed before the August 2nd deadline. Unfortunately this critical question seems to have been ignored by most of those charged with answering it. Once an answer is reached, the rest certainly appears to be a matter of details. (Astronomical numbers of tedious and annoying details, as only government can create them, but details nonetheless.)

While attempting to provide no direct answers myself, I think that a reasonable person could discern the way that I am leaning through this latest attempt at putting my two cents in on the debate raging in Congress over raising the debt ceiling in this country. Editor-in-Chief Michael was kind enough to add "More or Less" to the TFP website today for your edification.

Since it's only Monday, this leaves both the mid-week TFP Star edition as well as the regular weekend edition to look forward to.

It promises to be a warm week in Toledo, and a stifling one in Kansas City. My recommendation would be to find a cool spot with Wi-Fi and spend a little time with Toledo's largest Sunday circulation and Best Weekly Newspaper, the Toledo Free Press

The "Stuck On Stupid" Dictionary #31

Recognizing that there are now over thirty entries in the 'SOS Dictionary'. I would like to once again thank Maggie Thurber of "Thurber's Thoughts" for the inspiration to begin this effort over three years ago. Working on these particular posts allows me to walk the tightrope between meaningful perspective and humor, with generous doses of irony and sarcasm thrown in for seasoning.


Ongoing discussions continue between representatives of the legislature and the White House over increasing the Debt Ceiling of this country have mandated that those of us here at the SOS Dictionary continue our emergency sessions. While the effort is proving rather exhausting to our lexicographers, the fact that 'Just Blowing Smoke' is a non-union workplace in a 'Right-to-Work State' means that we can pretty much do whatever we want to the staff with complete impunity.

Now for those of you who have somehow managed to miss previous postings in this area (shame on you, now go back and read all of the postings under the title of dictionary, SOS, or Stuck on Stupid), the SOS dictionary is a reference guide to terms which nominally mean something to the rest of the English speaking world, but appear to mean something entirely different to those us who have come to understand the often peculiar political vernacular of Toledo and Northwest Ohio. 


Billion:
 1. A number with 9 zeroes after it ( x,000,000,000). 2. A number which was once unimaginable to contemplate, except as a function of higher mathematics; but which is now considered little more than 'chump change' when speaking about government spending or debt. 3. A number once made famous by Carl Sagan for counting stars "billions and billions". Fortunately Carl passed into the great beyond before the numbers of stars were all but supplanted by those in the national debt. 4. A number which we now toss around in discussions of the federal budget with little or no regard for its value (relative or otherwise) and even less concern. (see Trillion) 


Government Debt:
 1. The money that the federal government borrows in the form of bonds or other promissory notes. 2. The money that the federal government borrows these days to, for the most part, pay off the money that it previously borrowed. 3. A snowball rolling downhill that threatens to take all of us out in the ensuing avalanche. 


Government Debt Ceiling:
 1. The limit of the debt that the government is allowed to incur by law. 
2. The limit of debt that the government is allowed to incur until it threatens Congress with dire consequences and is allowed to borrow even more. 
3. An amount of money which in fact appears to have no real or finite limit, only the ability to feed and grow like the creature in the movie "The Blob" (the original with Steve McQueen, not the silly remake.) 


Government Default:
1. A term used to define the inability or refusal of a government to meet a financial obligation previously incurred. 
2. A term used to motivate media pundits, terrify voters, and aggravate legislators into allowing a government that already owes too much money into borrowing more. 
3. A mostly meaningless term where this country is concerned with absolutely no basis in fact, which is of little use except to frighten those with no clear grasp reality (the aforementioned media pundits, voters, and legislators). 


Trillion:
1. A number with 12 zeroes after it ( x,000,000,000,000). 
2. A number which was once unimaginable to contemplate, except as a function of higher mathematics; but which we now toss around in discussions of the federal budget with little more than a yawn and a wave of the hand when speaking about government spending or debt. (see Billion)


SNAFU and; FUBAR:
1. Terms which the staff at the SOS Dictionary (in a rare exhibition of good taste) were willing to list, but seem adamantly disinclined to define further. 
2. The only terms that the staff seem to agree upon as adequately describing the current state of the Debt Ceiling, the plans being discussed to resolve it, and the likelihood that they will actually do so In order to provide perspective relating to the terminology of the Debt Ceiling, I reference the following chart from the Office of Management and Budget, as provided by Heritage. org