After watching the Occupy Wall Street protests for a couple weeks I really hoped the protester would do their thing for a while and then go home. Not so surprisingly the protesters are still at it.
Since I’ve confessed before to listening to Glenn Beck, I look for George Soros under every rock. And since Beck warned us many months ago this type of protest was coming, driven by left wing organizations funded by Soros it’s only disappointing that Beck was right. Craig’s List ads recruiting folks to be paid protesters is a good indicator they’re not there on principle; paid bail and legal aid for protesters who are arrested, who are encouraged to do illegal acts so they will be arrested and food brought in to feed the protesters paid for by someone else are a few examples.
As I watch it happening, listening to the television interviews of some of the protesters it’s clear many of them are there just for the experience; not because of anything specific but because they want to be a part of it. Who can blame young folks for following a pied piper who promises a good time if they will just join the crowd?
At the same time I’m also hearing folks complaining to Wall Street about the lack of jobs; or that Capitalism is the root of all evil. On the one hand they blame business for not creating a job for them then they demonize the system that can create jobs. It’s clear that Economics 101 was not one of the classes they took in college.
And since a goodly number of the protesters are unemployed recent college graduates angry and afraid because life is not fair they are looking for someone to blame. It’s unfortunate that American History and Government weren’t classes they took either since then they might understand the role of government in our economic system.
I’m disappointed that college educated young people, out of ignorance, are focusing their anger on the system that could be their salvation. I’m disappointed that these kids are paying for an education but getting a meaningless diploma; and pay they will even if there are no jobs.
Which brings me to…
Many of the protesters didn’t pay for their educations yet, they borrowed the money to go to college and now that they are out, their lenders are expecting to be repaid.
The economy has been in the tank for three or four years now so these recent graduates should’ve had an inkling that the competition for jobs would be fierce yet they still went heavily into debt to get an education with little likelihood of getting a job when they graduated. And now, they are angry? Help me understand, what job you are hoping to land when you get your degree in Women’s Studies or Art History? Shouldn’t a job or career be a consideration for students if their “education” requires they take on so much debt?
Nobody forced them to borrow the money and maybe prudence might have suggested that in a recession they might choose a more conservative strategy but like some of their career choices poor judgment was wide spread and now they want to blame someone else.
It’s time for these kids to understand that the crappy economy has been crappy for all of us. You don’t have to be unemployed to understand the plight of Americans today, young and old. Many of us have learned the brutal lesson that when we make bad choices there is a reckoning; but we step up, we take our medicine and we move on.
If the protesters are serious about changing things so they will have jobs in the future they need to ask the companies they hoped would hire them why they don’t have jobs for them and listen carefully to their answers. More likely than not, the culprit will be too much government. Then the protesters can decide whether they are protesting in the right places. If you can’t figure out which companies to ask, you probably got your degree in the wrong field!
American businesses would like nothing better than to have jobs for every young person graduating from college today because that would signal that our government has gotten off their backs and the economy is moving productively again. If only we could convince the government to get with the program.
Sequestration or Castration; You Pick!
by Steve DanaWe have just under a week for the “Super Committee” to complete the work outlined in the Budget Control Act of August 2011 and the progress reports are not encouraging. Characterizing the committee as “Super” may have been a mistake considering every aspect of their work plan has been anything but super.
In my view, when the Budget Control Act was passed, Republicans gave away the farm. They gave the President and Congressional Democrats the ability to raise the national debt by 20% over 16 months without one meaningful concession; not one!
Politicians talk about cutting spending by thirty or forty or a hundred billion out loud then follow that with “over the next ten years” in a muffled voice. I’m not sure it really matters what they say since they don’t adopt and follow budgets anyway. But that was the deal. They would reduce spending in budget cycles starting in 2013 out into the future when many of them will be long gone and out of office.
I can only imagine how good it felt standing up to the microphone and looking into those TV cameras telling viewers how we negotiated hard and got the best deal we could for not just our side, but for the American people. “We agreed to increase the national debt by another 20% between now (August 2011) and January 2013 (just before inaugurating the next President) in exchange for spending cuts totaling $1.2 trillion over the next ten years to be determined by a “Super” Committee made up of twelve members of Congress; half from the Senate and half from the House; half Democrats and half Republicans before Thanksgiving of this year. Failing in that mission, a process called Sequestration will be implemented where every department will suffer equal percentage budget cuts to achieve the stated goal.”
For the Democrats on that podium, that was a euphoric feeling, knowing they had bent over the Republicans again. Don’t you remember a sly smile from Harry Reid as he talked about slashing $1.2 trillion, knowing full well it would never happen?
For the Republicans on the podium, I’m not sure what they felt. I know they should have felt like a kid in Jerry Sandusky’s shower room.
I guess I’m too damn stupid to see how that agreement was in any way good for Republicans; on any level. And frankly for the American people either. But what do I know, I’m just a fry cook?
Number one, we authorized increasing the debt when we said we wouldn’t.
Number two, we agreed to a spending reduction process that had no meaningful reference points and no down side for the Democrats. Sure, cutting some of those social programs would cause the Dems to wince a little, but considering the hurt it would cause for R’s it was a hit they felt was well worth it.
If the Super Committee cannot negotiate a deal with the Republicans they just punt and allow the “Sequestration” to cut the budget which will target Defense spending at a time when we have already cut their budget significantly.
Now as we approach the drop dead date for the committee to finish their work, we’re still hopelessly deadlocked. No, wait, the Republicans are starting to talk about some tax increases as being okay. The Speaker is warming up to the idea of a tax increase for those rich bastards just so we never have to face the prospects of SEQUESTRATION.
How can the Republicans be afraid of Sequestration at this point? What they should have been afraid of was the CASTRATION they went through when they voted for the Budget Control Act at the start of this process. Were they just stupid or is the fix in?
The National Debt will increase to $16 Trillion, tax rates will be raised for rich bastards and spending will not change one iota.
I’m beginning to believe Jack Abramoff was right when he talked about how lobbyists own our elected officials. It may not be Jack pulling the strings, but someone with interests different than mine certainly is.
Posted in Federal Government, Partisan Politics, Political commentary | Leave a Comment »