The Ameri-Sino-GE-Goldman collaboration

While on the face of it libertarians can find little to complain about Obama's recent "conversion" to enterprise-focused concerns and move to the "center", for a libertarian who sees so many masks in the political realm, further consideration and much caution is called for.

I am one who doesn't believe a conversion has taken place -- after Obama's meeting with Bill Clinton and appointment of Bill Daley, it was obvious to me that first we'd see razzle, then we'd see dazzle. As I wrote in a previous post about The Very Important State, The Very Important Leaders of The Very Important State are not going to turn the market loose for any amount of creative destruction, innovation and bottom-up economic growth. In stead, we'll see the further development of State Capitalism as The Very Important State Leaders weave a global web with our weaving partners China, GE, Goldman Sachs and other Modern State Players. Since business has gone global, the Big States and Big Businesses are actually concentrating on Global Capitalism.

All this does nothing to create the necessary open environment in which small to medium enterprises can flourish. This current change is central planning (not direct price, wage and production planning, but rather overall management of direction of the Global Economy) on steroids. It's still statism, just statism in the service of wealth creation that's controlled by Big States. If American government policy can benefit GE, Goldman, China (which is like a Big Corporation) and the other chosen, global movers and shakers, then Obama and the progressives get what they need to provide the infrastructure development which fits into their agenda (alternative energy, high speed rail), and it creates jobs at the same time. This type of global and domestic "investment" will be sold as a new direction in which we keep apace of global changes, establishing America's position in the competitive global market.

In practice, domestically, it will amount to corporate/union welfare/favoritism and support-purchase for re-election in 2012. So, I'm not impressed by Obama's "move to the center". The center? Of what? Global statist management? Jump on board all you opportunists -- mark your place and hope they need you next year.

Fat Cats own the new Republicans in Congress

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40913123/ns/politics/

Well, this was to be expected. Of course it's the Fat Cats. How did Fat Cats become fat? Through government feeding. I know how to solve this problem, and it even addresses the Fat Cat money poured into Obama's campaign -- end all corporate welfare, bailouts, cronyism and favoritism -- end it right away! Write legislation to ban all government actions in business which favor some over others and write the legislation tight, tight as Dick's hat band, then caulk it, check for leaks, then caulk it again -- just stop it -- then Fat Cats won't be supporting candidates they think will do them favors.

More on corporate welfare

I wrote quite a bit in 2010 about corporate welfare and why it should be ended, especially if you consider practically all my posts have something to do with limiting government and establishing a free market. Implicit in the call for limite government and a free market is an end to corporate welfare and all forms of business favoritism provided by government to select businesses or industries. This should be the most bi-partisan effort of all, but in fact, both parties will only talk about ending corporate welfare but never seriously pass legislation which prohibits such useless, wasteful assistance.

The government/Big Business collusion is too mutually beneficial for congress to prohibit it, but if the new Tea Party Republicans are serious, they will take this up soon and push it hard.

Capitalism has been perverted for centuries now by different forms of this collusion, and the unholy alliance between government and Big Business is anti-free market, designed to protect large companies from competition -- this is worse than statism, but, actually, it has become a distinctive feature of statism. First government expands its powers to interfere in economic matter by passing one regulation after another, then when congress is set up to be the economic gatekeeper, lobbyists come to shine the shoes and kiss the asses of politicians in order to gain favor and exemptions. Politicians use businesses to trade favors for financial support when election comes around. This power game among protected elites who use taxpayer money to favor certain businesses or industries is one of the most abhorent practices in government, yet it continues to get worse -- there are more powerful lobbyists in DC now than ever before.

This type of favortism and welfare should be permanently banned -- this is a good first step to limit government and open up competition in the market, allowing small players a chance to advance while breaking up the oligarchy of elites who don't deserve their success or wealth.

Surprise, surprise, Congress reacts to recommendations from deficit commission

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/10/commission-offers-controversial-solutions-axe-deficit-members-balk?test=latestnews

The fact that so many people are reacting to the commissions' suggestion of raising the retirement age for Social Security is indicative of the mindset created by SS. You can retire whenever you choose to retire, but many people have become dependent of SS and will have to wait. If we had left retirement and healthcare to individuals and a free market, plans would have been purhased long ago to meet retirement needs, and many people could retire at 50 or 55.

I noticed the commission doesn't address Obamacare, and I haven't heard anything about cutting out all corporate welfare. It might be in the recommendations, but I haven't heard it mentioned.

I have one suggestion to fix the deficit problem -- stop statism!

Shifting alliances

For decades the State has effectively divided middle and lower class from the upper class, but while buying off the middle class and lower class with welfare and safety net security, the State also bought off the upper class with corporate welfare and Big Business favoritism which protects Big Business from pesky competition coming from below.

By dividing society into warring factions, the State have prevented a private sector alliance which can limit the power of government. None of the three classes have seen much benefit in limiting the power of government as long as the State could afford to buy submission and apathy, but now the State is broke and its constant interventions have created uncertainty and economic stagnation.

Government programs will have to be cut, thus harming the lower class, and promises of Medicare and Social Security are in danger of default. With high unemployment and consumer caution, Big Business is in danger of higher taxes and financial troubles, although they are conserving cash at the moment -- the current trends can't continue, especially if foreign companies continue offering lower prices on goods and services, and our government is putting obstacles in the way of American companies to sufficiently respond.. Even government union workers will have to be drastically cut at some point, unless there are major changes.

The old industries which created a mutually beneficial relationship with the State are of much less value to the State, and the new politically correct industries will require subsidies, but, again, there's no money.

Our economic health depends on the creation of small and medium size businesses and the employment they generate, but he current political system is working against such creation. It appears that the State is in a bad situation and could lose the support of lower, middle and upper classes. When the public realizes that ending class wars in is everyone's interest, the State is in big trouble -- especially as decentralization and brain-work create smaller organizations which transcend the old military hierarchy of old industries. The relationships between company and employees become less command and control and more cooperative and equalized, so that the old battle between workers and evil rich bastards no longer makes much sense.

Who needs the poor? The State needs the poor's voting power, but the Democrats believe they have that locked, so they can ignore the poor with impunity -- they send out a little money and wash their hands of the problem. The money's running low, even the phony money.

American enterprise needs the poor. Enterprise needs the poor to become educated, skillful and prosperous. The burden of poverty and illiteracy doesn't help the private sector, it's a drain on the private sector. American enterprise first needs the government to leave it alone, then stable rules, then more educated, skillful workers, so it would be in the private sector's interest to develop private solutions to education and training to meet its needs for growth. 

The middle class needs the upper class to be successful in business so that more high paying jobs are available, so that the middle class can move up, leaving room for the poor to make advances in industry. We have to grow the pie, create new wealth, expand the economy. In order to accomplish this, it takes a cooperative effort, not class wars and dependence on the government.

The upper class rent-seekers have to realize that this crony game is hurting their interests, but whether they realize it or not, it has to stop, and this is where government does play a role, and the new breed of Republicans should be working overtime to end corporate welfare, completely.