No Loss for Words

Protesters in Madison, Wisconsin and everywhere across the land including Washington State have been characterized by the press as being either Union Activists or Tea Party Activists.  The folks in the press have decided that there are two sides in the discussion; one being the labor unions, the other being the Tea Party.  Maybe it’s a mistake to label the sides that way.  Are there really only those two choices?

I think it’s clear that since the focal point of this whole discussion is Collective Bargaining impacts to public budgets, the unions would, by necessity, be there protesting since their very existence might be at stake.

The curious part for me is the assumption that anyone who takes a position supporting the legislature and the governor of Wisconsin is a Tea Party Activist rather than a Republican or a concerned citizen from Wisconsin.  I can’t say that the Republican Party has done a lot to attract fiscally conservative Americans so not giving credit to Republicans and Independents for electing the current government in Wisconsin is not surprising. 

There is no doubt that the Republican Party has been the beneficiary of Tea Party efforts, but that is not the case because these folks have suddenly seen the error of their ways.  The Tea Party is not an organized political party, but they are previously silent concerned citizens that have banded together to fight for government that is faithful to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as they were written rather than the way they are mistakenly interpreted today.  It just happens that the Republican Party better represents the values of Middle America better than the Democrats.  The Republicans should not misread this support as an endorsement of ultra Conservative causes.

For decades our country has been the victim of a tug of war between left wing interests and right wing interests.  Average Americans have swung back and forth between the two without much involvement because they enjoyed steady improvement to their quality of life which offered them a lot of opportunities to enjoy prosperity.  It was because of the steady improvement that they felt comfortable leaving government to someone else. 

Then suddenly, steady improvement stalled and began to deteriorate which gave rise to the TEA Party movement.

Make no mistake; there have been some in the political arena who have been raising the alarm for many years so the problem didn’t just materialize when Barack Obama was elected President.  It could be that it took the election of the most liberal and radical president in our history to demonstrate how close our country is to being rendered a second class power.

Standing on the sidelines is no longer an option for average Americans.  If you care about your country, get involved.

The struggle taking place in Wisconsin is the beginning of a much larger battle that must be fought in every government agency from city councils to the federal government.  The struggle is not between Republicans and Democrats; it is between taxpayers and government labor unions. 

For many years labor unions have funded campaigns of candidates that when elected negotiated their contracts.  As a result, those elected officials approved union contracts for pay, benefits and pensions that would obligate taxpayers to pay without the taxpayers having an advocate at the table.

The Tea Party is Middle America and they are fed up with special interest government on both sides of the aisle.  They are fed up with political wrangling and partisan BS. 

Middle America has formed a partnership with the Republican Party for now to take a shot at restoring our country to the greatness we all know it deserves.  Failure of this effort will have dire consequences.

The President was on the West coast a week or so ago to huddle with a group of business executives primarily representing the tech sector; folks like Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg to talk about creating jobs.  After that gathering he came north to Portland Oregon to the unveiling of a new product line at Intel.

When Presidents go anywhere, they are almost always expected to have public remarks and the trip to Intel was no different.  I really wasn’t listening to the substance of Obama’s remarks because he always talks about job creation but he never delivers.

The reason for him being there was applicable because Intel is a great example of a private sector job creator.  The competition in the micro-chip industry keeps the players working their tails off to create products that are in demand in the market place.  This is a company that understands competition. When the existing products become stale or the competition begins to close the gap on market share there is a huge push for next generation products that raise the bar for everyone else in that industry.

So what is it that the President doesn’t understand about the difference between a government subsidy to a company to produce a product that has no demand in the market place and a company like Intel?

The whole tech sector is a product of market driven innovation offering the guy with the best product a chance to get filthy rich.  That is the American Dream.

The idea that by putting subsidy dollars into environmentally friendly products that nobody wants and would never pay for if their price were established by a competitive market we can create sustainable jobs is a joke.

The alternative plan for the government is to drive up the cost of producing those in-demand products so the price differential between the good stuff and the government preferred stuff favors the government preferred stuff, consumers will buy the government preferred stuff.

The government needs to get out of the business of anointing winners in a free market.  The market will do that all by itself.

Anyone who has been in business can attest that the process of bringing a product to market is a process of trial and error or listening carefully to your customers and tailoring your product to their demands. 

What the President and his economic development team is doing is similar to the old Soviet Union when the government would decide what was appropriate and only make those products.  Quality sucked and competition was “discouraged” through harassment.  Does that sound familiar?

Given a level playing field, American businesses are more than capable of creating all the jobs we need.  The biggest obstacles to job creation are government regulation and a legal system that rewards frivolous lawsuits.

We are not building electric power generating plants of any kind in this country because government regulations and environmentally related lawsuits either discourage them or prevent them outright.  Construction jobs building them would be good.  Operator jobs when they are completed would be better.

If the only consideration was the jobs created, fast tracking permitting and dismissing frivolous lawsuits would be worth the effort.  Then if you factor in the supply of energy we need to meet the demands of the market we get to be double winners.  So why wouldn’t the government work to clear these hurdles?

I wish President Obama was the only president that failed to clear hurdles but he isn’t.  The effort to create jobs will require the coordinated efforts of both the executive branch and the legislative branch over a sustained period of time.

The government will never be a job creator, but it is a great job killer.