AS IF THE FIRST OF THE MONTH BEING ON A FRIDAY WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOUR CORRESPONDENT, it just so happened that he had to get some shopping out of the way, not to mention getting his rent with the local council paid ... his city bus pass for the new month purchased ... and his iced tea maker being cleaned out, it having been awhile since that was given a decent cleaning.
In that last instance, I prefer prepared coffeemaker cleaners over vinegar, which can get to be rather smelly. And in any case, it's one cycle with the solution, followed by two cycles of water to rinse out. (This time around, it's Dip-it Automatic Coffeemaker Cleaner.)
And you wouldn't believe all the hardwater and lime deposits that came forth following the initial cleaning cycle!!
*************
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO STILL SEE THE SO-CALLED "RON PAUL REVOLUTION" AS THE LAST AND ONLY HOPE that America has for "liberty, peace and prosperity" in Indecision 2008, the good people @ The Nation have some thoughts about Ron Paul's socioeconomic programme, or want thereof, as should be worth thinking about:
The little man who wasn't there at the Republican TV debates is Ron Paul, the short-of-stature libertarian physician and Congressman. The debate moderators, who are threatening to become the ruin of electoral politics in the United States, almost never turn to ask Paul a question--that is, when he is allowed in the hall to participate.
On the occasions when they do toss a question Paul's way, they seem not to listen when he answers. And when he's finished, they turn away as if he hadn't said anything. Granted, libertarianism is a little outré and can sound as if it is close to anarchism. But there are times when Congressman Paul says things that are worth listening to.
He is the only candidate who brings up what is happening to our money, which is another way of saying that he is worried about why the cost of buying groceries is going through the roof. While the other presidential contenders are silent on the topic, Paul reminds us that "government officials consistently claimed that inflation is in check at barely 2 percent, but middle-class Americans know that their purchasing power--especially when it comes to housing, energy, medical care, and school tuition--is shrinking much faster than 2 percent each year."
Paul is the contender who seems to understand that the Federal Reserve Board is not the Vatican and that its chairman, Ben Bernanke, is not the pope. It's a fixed practice by our politicians to treat whoever is the chairman of the Fed as though he were endowed with infallible powers.
On Wall Street, the sharper ones know better. They understand that lowering interest rates every time the stock market swoons will eventually, or even a lot sooner, bring a world of pain down on us. As it is, thanks to the Fed, interest rates are lower than the rate of inflation. This anomalous condition is called "negative interest," and for savers it means that their money is disappearing even as it rests safely tucked away in certificates of deposit.
For people who understand that their money is evaporating in front of their eyes there is a mighty incentive to rush out to the mall while that money is still worth something. For the moment a stampede to the stores by inflation-spooked people may please the economic pooh-bahs because current theory has it that people will buy lots of stuff, which in turn will create lots of jobs. But after they've spent their retirement money, then what?
Then people can spend their economic stimulus money. Left undiscussed is how the government is going to get the money it plans to hand out to anybody who has a pulse. Maybe Uncle Sam can borrow it from the Chinese or the Arabs--although both groups are losing enthusiasm for making loans to be paid back in ever-shrinking dollars.
Neither the Europeans nor the Brits with their higher interest rate euros and pounds will have much interest in investing in lower-rate dollars. There don't seem to be many people left we can con into bailing us out of a mistake we repeatedly make.
The Federal Reserve Board can print the money, which is exactly what Ron Paul is afraid of. The more it prints, the less it's worth. The US suffered through years of high inflation in the 1970s and, from the standpoint of personal income, has never completely recovered.
If he could, Ron Paul would abolish three-quarters of the government, which works out to meaning that about three-quarters of what Ron Paul says falls into the "impractical dreamer" category. That leaves one-quarter--but that fraction of his agenda is, no pun intended, on the money.
=============
ON THE OTHER HAND, THE IDEA OF GOVERNMENT-SANCTIONED WASTEFUL AND FRIVOLOUS SPENDING in the name of socioeconomic stimulation (preferably among the Lower Classes, and in such cases preferably by way of Wally World) inspireth these remarks from columnist Jerome Christianson @ the local gazetta, wondering if the idea is really worth it in the end:
Welcome to government by T-shirt slogan: “When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping.”
With an economic crisis looming, the best our leaders can tell us is, “Hit the stores and hope for the best.”
Talk about Alice in Wonderland economics — first we spend ourselves to the brink of disaster, and now we have the great minds of Washington insisting that with a little help from the Fed we’re going to spend ourselves out of it. Does this make sense?
Let us review: Let’s start with a president deciding to put the Iraq war on the national Visa card; add to that all the folks cheerfully signing on to buy houses they can’t afford with loans they can’t repay, all the while putting $1.10 on the credit cards for every dollar in take-home pay. Meanwhile, if anything in your shopping cart isn’t stamped “Made in China,” it was made in Korea, Indonesia or Vietnam. Gas is up, food is up, heat is up, and our spirits are down.
So how do we cure what ails us? Why Uncle Sugar’s going to send most of us—the ones with jobs and first-world incomes—a nice little check; something to make us feel a little better, at least until Election Day.
Well, all I can say is I sure hope my kids remain childless. I’d feel guilty about borrowing that money from my grandkids. They’re the ones who’ll be paying it back—as if we care.
I tell you, we sure can be a sorry, snively bunch.
Faced with a Depression far deeper and far grimmer than anything most of us have experienced, President Franklin Roosevelt told our grandparents and great-grandparents they had “nothing to fear but fear itself.” Our current president just tells us about all the things he wants us to be afraid of. And, to our shame, we take him seriously.
Other generations were called upon to dig deep and sacrifice for the common good. We’ve been called upon to dig deep and sacrifice for the Gucci at Macy’s.
Think about it. When our country faced down the real Hitler after the real Pearl Harbor—that was after 11 years of the Great Depression, mind you—where did the money come from to build the tanks, the bombs and the B-29s? Uncle Sam hit up the American people, and they bought the war bonds and saving stamps, paid the taxes, put up with rationed gas, rationed sugar and no new cars for the duration. More recently, when Americans asked their president what we could do after Sept. 11, Dubya sent us to the mall.
It says more than we should like it to that we, the American people, are generally identified simply as consumers. When I think about it, more than anything, it brings to mind a nest full of naked, baby birds — beaks gaped open, waiting eagerly for whatever it is that will be stuffed down their throats next.
Not always. We once were a nation of producers—the “Arsenal of Democracy” we boasted, and with every justification. There was a time when people bought and owned what they did in order that they could better do what they did—raise a crop, make shoes, cast steel, build a cathedral. And they did it with pride.
Maybe it’s that pride that made those generations different from ours.
Faced with truly hard times the president and the Congress bought us Hoover Dam, the Golden Gate Bridge, our own City Hall and, if you look at the curb in the older parts of town you can still find stamped into the concrete “WPA 1936.” This president and this Congress look to buy us a PlayStation or Wii with the money landing in a bank in Shanghai.
And our country is in need of the money politicians are suddenly eager to have us spend—just as it was three quarters of a century ago.
Indeed, the bridges they built then are falling; the water mains they laid then are leaking; the national character they built is crumbling. In the ’30s, the president and the Congress looked for ways to put money into their constituents’ hands—constituents who needed work, needed heat, needed food for the family table. This president promises to veto increased funding for heating assistance, for food stamps, for the unemployed and the Congress will go along rather than risk their promise of big screen TVs to the reasonably affluent.
And no, if the check arrives in my mailbox, I won’t stamp it “Return to Sender.” I’ll just write it off as another example of wasteful government spending, stick it in the bank and go on with my business. I gave it to them once with the intent that they make good use of it—build a road, feed a soldier, buy a textbook—and they let me down. They’re letting us all down.
Better yet: Might I suggest turning over any rebate cheques you get (if @ all) to the Bureau of the Public Debt, using the same as Voluntary Gifts to Reduce the National Debt Held by the Public.
Unless someone out there can show cause why maintaining the National Debt @ such high levels as now ($9 trillion and climbing) is necessary for the sake of National Identity. (You can leave them in the Comments section.)
And PLEASE, spare us the "political reasons" patsies and platitudes!
