Nancy Pelosi Hates Nonunion Workers because She Can’t Collect Tribute from Them Like She Can from Union Workers

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 6th, 2011

Week in Review

Nancy Pelosi believes there is such a thing as a bad job.  And I’m not talking about flipping burgers.  I’m talking about building jet planes.  Normally good.  As jet planes dominate U.S. exports.  But these jobs are only good jobs when they are in Seattle.  Not in nonunion South Carolina (see Pelosi Vs. Boeing — And Jobs posted 11/1/2011 on Investors.com).

“Do you think it’s right that Boeing has to close down that plant in South Carolina because it’s nonunion?” asked host Maria Bartiromo.

Pelosi’s quick answer was “yes.”

Pelosi said she preferred the plant in the right-to-work state would unionize; failing that, the National Labor Relations Board is right to shut down the plant where Boeing hopes to build its Dreamliner passenger aircraft.

So instead of adding jobs to the economy Ms. Pelosi would prefer these people collect unemployment checks.  Why?

Union representation must be forced on them so they can be forced to pay union dues, a big chunk of which is funneled into Democratic campaign coffers. Over the past two years, the [International Association of Machinists] donated $1.98 million to Democratic candidates and $34,000 to Republicans.

Similarly, the trillion dollars in wasted stimulus and other legislation have gone mostly to projects using union workers, in particular teacher and construction unions. Stimulus money has also gone to failing but politically connected firms like Solyndra, whose major investors are big Democratic donors.

Nancy and her Democrat colleagues are greedy.  And pine for the days when people like them ruled over others.  Simply by being born into the nobility.  With democracy putting the kibosh on aristocracy they have come up with this clever ruse to put taxpayer dollars into their pockets.

They still steal it.  But not directly.  They give it to someone else.  Who then gives some of it back to them.  If this sounds familiar you may have seen this in the movies.  We call it ‘money laundering’.  She calls it tribute.  The proper respect paid to her privileged class.

This is what it’s all about in the Democrat party.  The money.  So when you hear them talk about creating jobs and stimulating the economy it’s what we call in politics ‘lying’.

They just want the money.  And could care less whether or not they create a job.  If you disagree answer me this.  After 5 years of Pelosi/Obama and all of that stimulus, where are the jobs?

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #59: “When the Right partners with business the Left calls it crony capitalism. When they partner with business the Left calls that smart government.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 31st, 2011

Microsoft Learns the hard way to Lobby Congress

Microsoft was a rogue corporation.  A big, profitable, rogue corporation.  And it was in the government’s crosshairs.  With all of their going about their business.  Alone.  Without any federal assistance.  Who did these people think they were?  They didn’t spend a dime lobbying the federal government for anything.  As if they could just go on about their business competing in the free market.  Scoffing at the government’s business resources.  All those things they could bring to the table.  To make an unorganized market organized.  Make Microsoft better.  Make Microsoft’s products better.  All for a nominal fee.  Some campaign contributions.  A vacation junket or two.  A little monkey business with someone you’re not married to.  A Roman indulgence of intoxicating substances and flesh.  You know, lobbying stuff.  But no!  Not Microsoft.  Those holier than thou sons of bitches.  Who did they think they were?

Well, Microsoft went too far.  Pissed off the wrong people.  People with friends in Washington.  People with power.  And a justice department.  Empowered with antitrust legislation.  Big, nasty, legal teeth.  Their crime?  They gave away Internet Explorer free.  And that was unfair to their competitors.  But it was a sweet deal to the consumer.  None of them complained.  They were happy to get IE free.  It saved them money.  It was their competitors that were pissed.  Because they couldn’t sell something that Microsoft was giving away free.  So the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued Microsoft claiming they violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.  Which Congress passed in 1890 to protect consumers.  And here the DOJ was fighting a case.  And if the DOJ won, the consumer lost.  They would have to pay for IE or a web browser from one of Microsoft’s competitors.  Which just goes to prove that it is never a consumer that complains about ‘predatory’ pricing.  It’s always a competitor that can’t compete at the same price that runs to the DOJ crying for antitrust protection.

Microsoft learned a very important lesson.  When you sit on big piles of money you don’t dis the federal government.  You show them the proper respect and give them some of that money. For your own protection.  For if you don’t they will go after you.  Like they did with Microsoft.  Who is smarter now.  Today, Microsoft spends millions on lobbyists.  To pay tribute for the pleasure of being left alone to operate in the free market.

Money Corrupts, Big Piles of Money Corrupt Absolutely

Microsoft is not alone.  There are a lot of honest companies out there.  But, sadly, there are a lot that aren’t.  Especially if they have a friend in Washington.  Because Washington sits on great big piles of money courtesy of the tax payers.  And a select few spend that money.   Put these two together and it’s a recipe for corruption.  Because one person can skim a little off the top of a huge transaction that is all but impossible to see.  Unless you start living like a Rockefeller on a government salary, that is.

The Teapot Dome scandal was the biggest government scandal of its time.  It involved leases to oil reserves transferred from the Navy to the Department of the Interior.  These were strategic reserves for our navy in case we went to war.  Important to have.  Because you don’t want to run out of oil during a war.  Albert Fall was the Secretary of the Interior.  And it was his job to lease those oil reserves.  Which he did.  But they didn’t go to the low bidder.  They went to the one that made it most worth his while.  Ultimately it was all that ‘making it worth his while’ that did him in.  He became a very rich man.  Which was impossible on his salary.  So they caught him.

Congressmen profit as Shareholders in Crédit Mobilier

The Teapot Dome was a big scandal perpetrated by a few players.  The Crédit Mobilier scandal, on the other hand, had far greater tentacles.  And is a good example of how government partnering with business goes wrong.  It involved the Union Pacific Railroad.  A sham company they created called Crédit Mobilier.  And some 30 Congressmen. 

The railroad to the pacific was a risky proposition.  It would take a very long time to build.  It would go through some very difficult terrain and hostile Indian country.  And there were few shippers on the proposed road.  In other words, it would take a long time to earn any revenue on this line.  And it was possible that they would never complete it.  Or ship enough freight to operate it profitably.  So the government stepped in and partnered with the Union Pacific.  And the fraud began.

The trick was how to make this loser a winner.  Railroad profits weren’t the answer.  So how can a railroad company make a profit without running any trains?  Why, from construction, of course.  That’s where Crédit Mobilier came in.  They built the railroad.  Billed Union Pacific.  Who then billed the government.  And, surprise, surprise, construction costs went way over budget.  Because they were overbilling Union Pacific.  Who then overbilled the government.  But the government just kept on paying.  Why?  Because they had shares in the very profitable Crédit Mobilier.  You see, when you share in the obscene profits of a government contractor you have little incentive to see or stop the fraud.

Government Steps into the Mortgage Business and Gives us the Subprime Mortgage Crisis

For years the federal government implemented policies to increase home ownership.  In their models, this was the driver of all economic activity.  A lot of material and labor builds a house.  And a lot of material and labor builds the things that furnish a house.  Ergo, the more people who bought houses the greater the economic activity.  And that meant everyone.  Even the people who couldn’t qualify for a mortgage.  A lot of which were minorities.  So if a bank denied anyone a mortgage, it just reeked of racism.  So lenders had to find a way to make the unqualified qualified before the DOJ charged them with discrimination in lending.  So, in the mid 1990s, they figured out how to make the unqualified qualified.  Along with a little help from the government.

The subprime mortgage was the vehicle.  Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMS).  And No Income No Asset (NINA, aka, Ninja) loans.  Of course, these by themselves didn’t solve any problem.  Because no respectable lender would ever approve such risky mortgages.  This is where government came in.  Or, rather, the Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE).  Better known to you and me as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Here’s how it worked.  The GSEs bought those risky loans from the lenders.  Then sold them to Wall Street.  Where investment bankers packaged them into Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) and Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO).  High risk loans became low-risk, high-yield securities.  The risk was transferred from the bank to the taxpayer and then to the investor.  And back to the taxpayers when they had to pay for the bailout of the subprime mortgage crisis.

The enabler for this great financial crisis was the government.  First ‘encouraging’ banks to loan to the unqualified.  And then by their partnership with the GSEs.  Encouraging more and more risky behavior because they were getting a piece of the action.  So they turned a blind eye.  Even when some warned the committees responsible for their oversight.  They laughed.  Said they were just mean racists trying to deny fair and affordable housing to minorities.  And they insisted that these GSEs were financially strong and healthy.  Up until the world learned they weren’t.

Crony Capitalism can be Smart Government if it Saves the Environment

There’s one reason why government partners with business.  Corruption.  Crony capitalism.  Either an unscrupulous business trying to buy favors for personal gain.  Or an unscrupulous politician trying to sell favors for personal gain.  And good luck if you run an honest business.  Because the buying and selling of favors simply becomes paying tribute to be left alone.

Both sides are guilty of this.  Though the Left says it’s the Right that is in the pocket of the corporations.  Which is funny.  Because the Left is just as guilty.  But when they do it, it serves a higher purpose. So it’s smart government.  Such as when one of the world’s largest corporations, GE, doesn’t pay any income taxes.  By using some creative accounting practices.  But they’re very cozy with the current administration.  So they get a pass.  And they’re eager to cash in on all that green legislation.  To help them sell their green products.  You see, that’s good for the environment.  So it’s okay that they don’t pay income taxes.  And, more importantly, they have lobbyists.  They know how to play the game.  And they play it well.

But when the Right wants to cut the corporate income tax to stimulate the economy to create jobs, that’s just corporate welfare.  They’ll fight that every day of the week.  But if a corporation’s lobbyists treat them well, they’ll make the incandescent light bulb illegal.  So that corporation can sell more of their compact fluorescent lamps.  But that’s not crony capitalism.  That’s just smart government.  Because it saves the environment.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #19: “Philosophical debates can be effective but character assassination is more expedient, especially when no one agrees with your philosophy.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 24th, 2010

THOMAS JEFFERSON HATED Alexander Hamilton.  So much so he hired Philip Freneau as a translator in his State Department in George Washington’s administration.  You see, Jefferson did not like confrontation.  So he needed a way to slander Hamilton, his policies and the Washington administration without getting his own hands dirty.  And that was what Freneau was supposed to do with the money he earned while working in the State Department.  Publish a newspaper (National Gazette) and attack Hamilton, his policies and the Washington administration.  Papers then were partisan.  More so than today.  Then, lies and libel were tools of the trade.  And they knew how to dig up the dirt.  Or make it up. 

Another scandalmonger, James Callender, was slinging dirt for Jefferson.  And he hit pay dirt.  Mr. and Mrs. Reynolds of Philadelphia had a lucrative business.  They were blackmailing Alexander Hamilton.  Mr. Reynolds had his wife seduce Hamilton.  Which she did.  And did well.  They had an affair.  And Mr. Reynolds then blackmailed him.  Jefferson pounced.  Or, rather, Callender did.  To keep Jefferson’s hands clean.  Hamilton, Callender said, was using his position at the Treasury Department for personal gain.  He was using public funds to pay the blackmailer.  They found no proof of this.  And they did look for it.  Hard.  But when they came up empty, Jefferson said that it just proved what a good thief Hamilton was.  He was so good that he didn’t leave any traces of his treachery behind.

Of course, when you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.  And Jefferson’s association with Callender would come back and bite him in the ass.  In a big way.  Upset because Jefferson didn’t appropriately compensate him for all his loyal dirt slinging (he wanted the postmaster’s job in Richmond), he publicized the Sally Hemings rumors.  And after breaking the true story of the Hamilton affair, many would believe this scoop.  That Jefferson was having an affair with one of his slaves.  It was a dark cloud that would forever hang over Jefferson.  And his legacy.

Hamilton admitted to his affair.  Jefferson admitted to no affair.  Hamilton would never hold public office again and would later die in a duel with Jefferson’s one-time toady, Aaron Burr.  This duel resulted because Hamilton was doing whatever he could to keep the amoral and unscrupulous Burr from public office (in this case, it was the governorship of New York).  When the election of 1800 resulted in a tie between Jefferson and Burr, Hamilton urged the House to vote for Jefferson, his archenemy.   Despite what had appeared in the press, Hamilton did have morals and scruples.  Unlike some.  Speaking of which, Jefferson would go on to serve 2 terms as president.  And all of that angst about Hamiltonian policies?  They all went out the window with the Louisiana Purchase (which was unconstitutional, Big Government and Big Finance).

RONALD REAGAN WAS routinely called old, senile and out of touch by the entertainment community, the media and his political foes.  But he bested Mikhail Gorbachev and the Soviet Union, something Jimmy Carter never did.  He said ‘no’ at Reykjavik because he told the American people that he wouldn’t give up the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).  He knew the Soviet Union was bleeding.  Communism was a farce.  It inhibited human capital.  And impoverished her people.  SDI may have been science fiction in the 1980s, but capitalism wasn’t.  It could do it all.  Including SDI.  The Soviet Union was on the ropes and Reagan would give no quarter.  The days of living in fear of the mushroom cloud were over.  And capitalism would deliver the knockout punch.

Reaganomics, of course, made this all possible.  Supply-side economics.  Which follows the Austrian school.  Say’s Law.  ‘Supply creates demand’.  You don’t stimulate the economy by taxing one group of people so another group can spend.  You stimulate it by creating incentives for risk takers to take risks.  And when they do, they create jobs.  And wealth.

Tax and spend is a failed Keynesian, zero-sum economic policy.  When you take from the earners and give to the non-earners, we just transfer purchasing power.  We don’t create it.  For some to spend more, others must spend less.  Hence, zero-sum.  The net some of goods and services people are purchasing remains the same.  Different people are just doing the purchasing.

When Apple invented the Macintosh personal computer (PC), few were demanding a PC with a graphical user interface (GUI).  But Apple was innovative.  They created something they thought the people would want.  And they did.  They took a risk.  And the Macintosh with its mouse and GUI took off.  Apple manufacturing increased and added jobs.  Retail outlets for the Macintosh expanded and created jobs.  Software firms hired more engineers to write code.  And other firms hired more people to engineer and manufacture PC accessories.  There was a net increase in jobs and wealth.  Just as Say’s Law predicts.  Supply-side economics works.

Of course, the Left hates Reagan and attacked Reaganomics with a vengeance.  They attacked Reagan for being pro-rich.  For not caring about the poor.  And they revised history.  They say the only thing the Reagan tax cuts gave us were record deficits.  Of course, what those tax cuts gave us were record tax receipts.  The government never collected more money.  The House of Representatives (who spends the money), awash in cash, just spent that money faster than the treasury collected it.  The record shows Reaganomics worked.  Lower tax rates spurred economic activity.  More activity generated more jobs and more personal wealth.  Which resulted in more people paying more taxes.  More people paying taxes at a lower rate equaled more tax revenue in the aggregate.  It works.  And it works every time people try it. 

Because Reaganomics worked and showed the Left’s policies were failures, they had to attack Reagan.  To discredit him.  They had to destroy the man.  Except when they’re running for elected office.  Then they strive to show how much more Reagan-like they are than their conservative opponents.  Because they know Reaganomics worked.  And they know that we know Reaganomics worked.

GEORGE W. BUSH was routinely called an ‘idiot’ by the entertainment community, the media and his political foes.  Yet this ‘idiot’ seems to have outwitted the elite of the liberal Left time and time again.  I mean, if their policies were winning, they would be no reason to have attacked Bush in the first place.  The Left hated him with such vitriol that they said he blew up the Twin Towers on 9/11 as a justification for invading Iraq for her oil.  It was Big Oil’s lust for profit, after all, that was driving this Texan’s Big Oil policies.  And taking Iraq’s oil would increase Big Oil’s sales and give her even more obscene profits.

If Bush was an idiot, he must have been an idiot genius to come up with a plan like that.  Then again, gasoline prices crept to $4/gallon following the Iraq War.  Had all that oil gone on the market according to plan, that wouldn’t have happened.  Unless the plan was to keep that oil OFF of the market, thus, by rules of supply and demand, the price of oil (and the gasoline we make from it) would go up thus enriching Big Oil through higher prices resulting from a lower sales volume.  My god, what evil genius.  For an idiot.  Of course, gas taxes, numerous summer gas blends (required by the government’s environmental policies), an aging and over-taxed pipeline infrastructure and insufficient refinery capacity (the government’s environmental policies make it too punishing even to consider building a new refinery) to meet increasing demand (soaring in India and China) had nothing to do with the rise in gas prices.

IS THE POLITICAL Left evil?  Probably not.  Just amoral.  They have an agenda.  They survive on political spoils and patronage.  Old time politics.  Enrich themselves through cronyism.  If tribute is paid they’ll extend favorable treatment.  If tribute is not paid, they will release their wrath via hostile regulation, litigation, Congressional investigation and punitive taxation.  Just like they did to Big Tobacco (and, no, it wasn’t about our health.  They could have just made tobacco illegal.  But they didn’t.  Why?  It just brings in way too much money to the government.  Via sin taxes.  And federal lawsuits.  And with it being addictive, it’s a frickin cash piñata for them.)

They know few agree with their philosophy.  But they don’t care.  It’s not about national prosperity.  It’s about power.  And they want it.  That’s why they can’t debate the issues.  They know they can’t win.  So they attack the messenger.  Not the message.  If you don’t believe that, you can ask Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and just about any other Republican.  Well, you can’t ask Lincoln or Reagan.  But you can guess what they would say.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,