Archive for category Environment
Who Owns Obama and the Democrats?
Posted by Tom in Democrats, Economics, Energy Facts & Policies, Environment, Individual Freedom, Politics, Unions, Wall Street on January 29, 2010
There are primarily four major political groups that literally own Obama, Reid, Pelosi and the rest of the Democrats: Unions, particularly the public employee unions. Trial lawyers. Environmentalists. And, Wall Street and Business Rent Seekers. The cost of these relationships to the economy and to our freedom is significant but difficult to completely quantify.
Unions. According to the latest figures overall union membership as a percentage of the workforce has held steady with 2008 at 12.4% and 2009 at 12.3%. Within that overall group, however, the private sector unionization declined from 7.6 to 7.2% while the public sector grew from 36.8 to 37.4%. It’s no secret that Obama favored the unions over the bondholders in his nationalization of GM and Chrysler. Nor is it a secret that his most frequent visitor is Andy Stern who will let you know what they spent to get Obama elected! Oh, and about 1 million of the federal work force are union members, 28% of the wage and salary workforce. As to the effects of this, see my post of January 7th Unions and Excessive Government Compensation.
Trial Lawyers. This is that monopoly of “professionals” who are licensed to represent real or pretended injured people for “contingency fees” of 25-50% of the awards obtained in trial or, more likely, settlement. These “injured” plaintiffs can be investors, cancer patients, or “whiplash” victims. Oftentimes the attorneys advertise to let them know they are “injured” or purchase new issue stock to become self fulfilling injured plaintiffs themselves! Recent cases have highlighted the manufactured testimony that these lawyers pay for, the perjury that they suborn. According to a recent post in OpenSecrets.org, during the last decade the trial lawyer given over 90% of their political contributions to the Democrats. In 2009 $2.86 Million to the Democrats and $140 Thousand to Republicans. Is it any wonder that there are no caps on medical malpractice damages in Obamacare? Thus big awards, large insurance premiums and defensive medicine will continue to drive up medical costs. (In the interest of full disclosure, I was once one of these trial lawyers, but as Woodrow Wilson said, “I have repented of it”)
Environmentalists. This is the most difficult economic drag and freedom surrender to estimate. Consider the ethanol debacle both in terms of costs and free market damage where the government pays producers to produce, forces customers to buy and restricts cheaper imports for a process and substance which increases greenhouse gasses! Consider the recent cap and trade bill passed by the House. Or, how about the CO2 we exhale and the EPA’s intention to regulate it as harmful! Has there been a cost-benefit analysis on the solar, wind, insulation state and federal tax and other subsidies or the wasted economic investment as a result thereof? And all of this for a “global warming science” in which the scientists manipulate the data!
Wall Street and Business Rent Seekers. Now we get to the folks we love to hate, the money guys who have long sucked at the Democratic teat. These folks spend the money to get the edge. They love cap and trade because they will become the traders getting the juice of commissions. They love Barney Frank’s push on Fannie and Freddie for more subprime mortgages because they generated fees from packaging and selling them as securities. Some felt “forced” to deal like drug companies, hospitals and insurance companies in the recent Obamacare debacle. Others just sought advantage over honest competition; in economic terms they are simply rent seekers.
These poor seekers of corporate welfare are the easiest to turn on for political reasons, so Obama is turning on them appearing like the populist he isn’t, while still taking their cash. This is truly fun to watch but is of little significance.
As long as the elite Democratic rulers are literally owned by these very special and influential interests, our economy will flounder and our freedoms will diminish.
FOLLOW UP: Media-Educators. At dinner tonight on this penultimate day of January Bill Collins suggested that Hollywood should have been included in the list of “owners.” Sure enough, common knowledge and a cursory internet search reminds us that Democrats dominate “Tinsel Town.” But this is just one segment of the media, the entertainment segment of the Fourth Estate, if you will. So, it seems incumbent to include the MSM (Main Stream Media) like MSNBC, CBS, ABC, CNN. It’s not too obvious that fawning lap dogs like Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann are more than a bit biased. Stretching the “media” definition we can easily include the educational establishment. Hard to find a non-Obama hope-change professor on a college campus today. It would seem fair to say that the Media-Educators should indeed be included in the list of owners of Obama and the Democrats. Their influence aside from environmentalism would seem to be more social than economic. Things like “gay marriage” and “don’t ask, don’t tell” interest them. The cost here is to our intelligence and to the future of our society, thus our freedom. This is hard to measure in economic terms. But it is perhaps more critical to our democracy. The lack of education, intelligence in the electorate, and a free press willing to to its critical, investigative job will if continued doom our future.
Pray that the next generations are smarter than ours and will remedy this sorry state of affairs!
Tom Motherway
Evil, Not Just Wrong
Posted by Tom in Environment on January 16, 2010
Tonight I watched “Not Evil Just Wrong” Phelim McAleer’s documentary exposing Al Gore’s alarmist environmentalism for the phoniness it is. It’s subtitle: “The True Cost of Global Warming Hysteria.” It presents the human side well. But it fails to present Al Gore’s profit side from this flimflam. The con artist is making money with this schtick; he is the true fat cat, literally and figuratively! So, as you can tell, I disagree with the title! Here’s a Cavuto interview on the documentary.
Get Serious About Serious Materials
Posted by Tom in Environment, Obama Budget & State of the Nation, Stimulus/Bailout on January 14, 2010
John Stossel’s FBN show on “crony capitalism” has a clip that’s too good not to post. Who says you can’t buy influence!
In Need of Some Levity?
Posted by Tom in Environment on December 9, 2009
Gordon Crovitz penned a pleasant oped in Monday’s WSJ, Climate of Uncertainty Heats Up. In it he debunks the liberals cry against the bloggers that there is no editorial board to fact-check and edit the reporters’ articles. As expected he notes that the MSM (Main Stream Media) has fallen on its collective ass, or sword or whatever, or alternatively, has been muzzled by the editors and publishers. No surprises here. But the latest scandal unearthed by the online conspirators is Climategate, heretofore ignored by the MSM, Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the Democratic demagogues now in control.
But it’s not as glum as Obama giving away $10 Billion of your grandchildren’s money and condemning them to serfdom. Crovitz notes that Jon Stewart on “The Daily Show” quipped, “Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony! Gordon also included a reference to “Hide the Decline” on YouTube, enjoy:
Industry Appeals For Regulation-To Avoid Obama Dictatorship
Posted by Tom in Centrally Managed Economy, Economics, Energy Facts & Policies, Environment, Government Regulation on December 8, 2009
How sad it is that this once great democracy has devolved to a leftist dictatorship with Obama as its head.
His EPA on Monday declared emissions of “greenhouse gasses” including carbon dioxide and five others to be a danger to human health. That’s right, Obama’s administrative agency has declared carbon dioxide hazardous to your health. Think of it, when you flatulate (pass gas), the EPA says it is harmful to your health. I wonder if it would be harmful if you stopped flatulating, even though it would more pleasant for the rest of us!
But I joke, only to show the silliness and seriousness of this very dangerous action. No doubt this announcement was timed to coincide with the opening of the Copenhagen climate talks where our erstwhile leader plans to contribute his “fair share,” $10 Billion of your money. Our young US prince rides into town with his nobel peace prize in hand and leads the US and Europe into economic collapse. And this in face of evidence that the global warming data has been manipulated to show a preordained conclusion that profits the Al-Gorelike prophets of doom. Could Alice in Wonderland have been in a more sane environment?
US industry is worried because in a sense our economy and in fact our country runs on things that produce CO2. Whether its that Big Mac you eat, the CNN show you watch, or the electric light switch you flip on, carbon dioxide is produced. The utilities are particularly worried, worried that some unelected bureaucrat at Obama’s EPA will shut them down. Or shut them down economically by requiring expensive processes and equipment that will raise the cost of production beyond affordability. Yes, in the end this all translates into a carbon tax that the American consumer will pay. Now the EPA is not required to consider economics in its rule making.
But never fear, an EPA spokeswoman–excuse me spokesperson–in defending the “dangerous to human health” finding, said ” we invite the public to review the extensive scientific analysis informing” it. (Yeah, right!) Yet Obama and his EPA totally ignore the East Anglia University email fraud debunking global warming, otherwise known as Climategate.
So today the WSJ reports that US industry is asking Congress to regulate it! How often to you see businessmen asking to be regulated? You would expect industry executives to oppose regulation. In fact, they generally do oppose it. But where they fear something worse, like uninformed fiat imposed by a dictator’s unaccountable minions, they need to influence the outcome. Thus they want to bring the regulatory proposals into the political process, talk to representatives and senators who depend on contributions to be re-elected. So for the businessmen it’s the lesser of two evils and understandable.
What’s puzzling though is why Obama would want to take uneconomic action, especially job-killing action in the midst of a recession, and at a time when his deficits are breaking records, his national debt pile up is beyond sustainability and the action will produce no environmental results. Can hubris be that strong? Or ignorance that deep? Or lust for power that blinding? I’m at a loss for an answer.
‘Tis a sad day for America, indeed!
Tom Motherway
“Fair Share” Most Dangerous Words in the English Language!
Posted by Tom in Economics, Environment, Foreign Policy on December 6, 2009
I mused several posts ago whether Obama would have the moral courage to expose the Climate-gate fraud which has already bilked taxpayers here and across the pond of millions of dollars and euros and which threatens a serious crippling of our economy. I initially had hope that Obama would–in light of the fraud–avoid US commitment to the global warming folly, since he was due to merely stop by the Copenhagen meeting early on his way to pick up his much earned Nobel peace prize. Well my hopes were dashed when he changed his schedule to join other leaders at the end of the meeting to conclude a “meaningful” climate deal.
The White House announced that the U.S. is prepared to pay its “fair share” of $10 Billion. That would be its “fair share” of your money, or rather–since Obama is borrowing that amount in addition to the trillions of deficit already committed–your children’s, grandchildren’s and great-grandchildren’s money.
So instead of questioning the scientists’, destruction of contrary climate data, their inability to explain the lack of warming this last decade, the manipulation of hockey-stick models, and the suppression of peer review, Obama has decided to affirm his allegiance to the old-time global warming religion.
Now we know Gore, another Nobel peace prize laureate has serious personal investments in the green revolution. And we know that Obama has allocated a significant part of our money in the phony stimulus package to the green revolution. But could there be any other motivation for his apparent blindness?
Why would he amidst a significant recession, double-digit unemployment, a weakened dollar, historic deficits and crippling debt commit this country to an additional tax and regulatory environment the consequences of which portend only downside? And what is fair about a “fair share” of $10 Billion? What is the other side of the fairness equation? Will U.S. taxpayers get any consideration, any quid pro quo? How was this “fair share” negotiated?
After many years of hearing the words “fair share” usually spouted by progressives and leftists, I’ve come to the conclusion that they are a disguise for theft and expropriation used by charlatans to advance an agenda. There is nothing fair about fair share. Any time you hear these words, be on guard and very skeptical!
Tom Motherway
Not Coming to a Theater Near You…Anytime Soon!
Posted by Tom in Environment on November 29, 2009
Thanks to the Canada Free Press
Will Obama Expose the Massive Climate Fraud at the Copenhagen Climate Conference?
Posted by Tom in Environment, Financial Policy, Press on November 25, 2009
Will our young president have the moral integrity to expose the massive climate fraud that has bilked billions from the taxpayers of the Western world? He has a choice-cover up the fraud which has and is being done by the MSM or expose it for what it is.
The recently exposed emails from the Hadley Climatic Research Unit at Britain’s University of East Anglia show that the mainstream world climate scientists who have lived off taxpayer research money for years have bound together in a massive conspiracy to (a) suppress peer review, (b) publish phony “hockey stick” temperature models, and (c) suppress temperature data that doesn’t fit the manufactured, fraudulent conclusion that we have man made global warming.
The leaked emails are devastating. Their content crumbles the very foundation of the global warming nonsense. Nigel Lawson, former British chancellor of the exchequer in demanding a full investigation stated: “Astonishingly, what appears, at least at first blush, to have emerged is that (a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend; (b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data; (c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and (d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals.”
The MSM segment of the Fourth Estate has been and continues to be complicit in the fraud by not investigating the hacked emails. The NYT for example says it won’t deal with such purloined information! So as a public service I refer three good articles on the topic: The Skeptics Are Vindicated by David Warren in the November 25th issue of Real Clear Politics. ClimateGate: The Fix Is In by Robert Tracinski in the November 24th issue of Real Clear Politics. And, The Climate Hoax by Jack Kelly in the November 24th issue of Real Clear Politics.
Jack Kelly tells about Al Gore’s appearance on NBC’s Tonight Show where Al in touting geothermal energy states that “the interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees, and the crust of the earth is hot.” As National Review’s John Derbyshire points out, “if the temperature anywhere inside the earth were ’several million degrees’ we’d be a star!” Kelly goes on to point out that Gore got a D in Natural Science at Harvard; it should have been a F! Yet, Newsweek calls Gore “the thinking man’s thinking man.”
What’s funny in all this mainstream press cover up is that while the scientists and the Gores of this world are profiting from the fraud, the press is becoming irrelevant with no lucre to show for it! My bet is that Obama will not expose the fraud in Copenhagen.
Tom Motherway
C4C–The Latest Obama Scam
Posted by Tom in Centrally Managed Economy, Environment on August 4, 2009
Cash for Clunkers is just another immoral Obamanomics scam. He has dished out a cool billion and plans to dish out another couple of billion of your children’s and grandchildren’s money so that some clunker drivers can have their perfectly good clunkers destroyed for some mythical mileage improvement on the order of 3 MPG! The religious environmentalists fail to point out the carbon costs of destroying perfectly good assets to manufacture other assets. This makes no sense either economically or environmentally.
The winner again is the UAW which seems to hold him captive. The liberals who advocate C4C spin it to the unwashed masses as free money. Yes, there is a free lunch, Rube! In fact, it is simple theft, robbing Peter to pay Paul with Obama as the fence extorting his vigorish.
The simpletons who buy into this program fail to see that the several billion could have been privately employed to invest in innovation, wealth creation, and jobs for a depressed economy. Those same simpletons fail to understand that the money must come from somewhere, that would be taxes and debt; that debt must be repaid with interest; it will be repaid by their children and grandchildren. Obama’s intergenerational immorality at it sleaziest!
Tom Motherway, tom@renohayek.com
Please, Just Stand There, Don’t Do Anything!
Posted by Tom in Energy Facts & Policies, Environment on July 2, 2009
How can the American Clean Energy and Security Act be justified to Americans during this severe recession? It is the worst of special interest pork barrels. It costs the taxpayers, current and future, dearly but provides no benefits. What reasonable person would buy off on this? In other words, how can the public be goaded into suspending reason.
Mat Welch, Editor in Chief of Reason Magazine, showcases the perennial argument of the demagogues to grow government and their own importance. “The Cost of Doing Something” is something we truly cannot afford!
On the eve of what would be a 219-212 House of Representatives vote in favor of the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the New York Times editorial board argued that whatever the bill’s eventual price tag, it sure beat “the costs of doing nothing.” Warned the Gray Lady: “By any measure—drought, famine, coastal devastation—the costs of inaction, of clinging to a broken energy policy, will dwarf the costs of acting now.”
If that argument sounds familiar, it is. Times columnist Paul Krugman, while declaring those 212 nay votes guilty of “treason against the planet,” posited that “we’re facing a clear and present danger to our way of life, perhaps even to civilization itself.” Therefore, “How can anyone justify failing to act?”
The same logic, minus some of the apocalyptic language, is being used this summer to push through President Barack Obama’s other massively expensive overhaul to the way America does business: health care reform. “I can assure you,” the president said recently in Green Bay, Wisconsin, “the cost of doing nothing is going to be a lot higher in the years to come. Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will keep going up. Our wages will be lower. Our jobs will be fewer. Our businesses will suffer.” Echoed Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius a week later: “The cost of doing nothing will render us a second rate nation on into the future.” Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), in subsequent House hearings, went still further: “There is not one child, not one worker, not one employer, nor one taxpayer who can further bear the cost of doing nothing.”
Hyperbole aside, the urge to have the government do something in the face of a perceived crisis is arguably the most powerful and effective legislative engine known to man. If the crisis is acute enough, backers of state intervention will even admit that content matters less than the mere existence of action itself. During the height of last fall’s financial panic, for example, New York Mayor and financial journalism titan Michael Bloomberg said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “Nobody knows exactly what they should do, but anything is better than nothing.” As the House of Representatives was passing the stimulus package this February, Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, thundered that “the cost of doing nothing would be catastrophic.” Auto bailout? “The cost of doing nothing is cataclysmic,” warned Sen. Bob Casey (D-Penn.) last December.
Read his full article on the link provided and just hope that the American people are a bit more intelligent than the ruling classes and charlatans think they are!
Tom Motherway, tom@renohayek.com