The Fallacy of Government Intervention

AmpersanArchist.com ^ | 2012-08-14 | AmpersanArchist1

[AMP1]

On 2012-08-03 Paul Krugman wrote an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times entitled “Debt, Depression, DeMarco”, excoriating the “the scorched-earth opposition of Republicans, who have done everything they can to get in ‘Obamas’ way — and who now, having blocked the president’s policies, hope to win the White House by claiming that his policies have failed.” Interesting! Perhaps instead of blaming Bush, the Republicans, conservative thinkers, the Eurozone, a naturally non-responsive economy, sun spots, The Coming Of Kohoutek and the Mayan calendar, Mr. Krugman would be looking inwardly because maybe, just maybe, the policies he and other leftists promote don’t work. You would think that after 3 and a half years the Obama administration would have the strength of conviction to take ownership of their decisions. It would be refreshing if they did. I will not hold my breath.

Krugman, a Nobel Laureate (2008 – Economics), is a well-respected professor of economics and Op-Ed columnist with the New York Times. In addition, he is a an advocate of Keynesian economics; holding that private sector decisions lead to an imbalance of and inefficient use of scarce resources necessitating government intervention; specifically monetary and fiscal policy by the central bank. Funny how such a book smart man can be so off the mark in when it comes down to common sense. This meddling in what should be and are absolutely private decisions by individuals is problematic because it makes the individual weak, helpless and dependent on an ever increasingly bloated and powerful federal bureaucracy. By injecting government into private sector decisions the individual is made small, weak and helpless. As Dennis Prager so eloquently states, “The bigger the government, the smaller the individual”.

Krugman, like every good leftist, believes in more government spending to support the economy, not less. He believes that the government can effectively choose winners and looser and that the government can more effectively guide the economy to growth, prosperity and a soft landing during this great economic storm. He does not mention, in his is Op-Ed piece that both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored lenders, got us into the current housing mess by pushing through loose and sloppy lending guidelines; effectively giving housing loans to buyers who could never afford the homes they were purchasing. These policies distort the market’s natural equilibrium by expanding and loosening lender guidelines for politically expedient ends. The government and politicians effectively bought votes of an underserved block of a less affluent constituency. Never mind that these misguided and ill-conceived programs have produced great pain and misery. Never mind that the government guaranteed these loans with tax payer monies; effectively creating a huge transfer of wealth.

I have always believed that the Keynesian theory of economics, vis-à-vis the tax code and meddlesome government programs, simply injects the government and disinterested, faceless and nameless bureaucrats, into private enterprise; distorting the natural flow of the market. I believe that individuals know how best to organize their lives and how to spend the money they earn. Simple is best and the fewer the number of stratified levels, in government and society brings about a more efficient use of resources. Simply put, it’s my money. These are my decisions. I am adult enough to accept the consequences. Bugger off. I will spend my money the way I believe is best for me and my family. What hubris and ultimately extreme narcissism to believe that an anonymous bureaucrat in an office in Washington, state capital or local government can redistribute my hard earned money better than me. But then again, these people have always believed they are wiser and smarter than the average citizen.

I am reminded of liberals complaining, in the 80’s, of the money wasted on expensive military programs. Remember those $1,200 toilets and $600 hammers? I remember knowing, even in my 20’s, that government does not and cannot distribute financial resources efficiently. Can you say the US Post Office, Amtrak, Solyndra and the Department of Education for starters? Yes, I knew you could. It is simply impossible. After all from the bureaucrats’ stand-point it’s always OPM: Other People’s Money. How ironic that the liberals who complained about military spending then, now believe the government knows how best to spend tax revenue, i.e. invest, on social programs like TARP, SNAP, Head Start, Making Homes Affordable, etc., etc., etc. Could it be that it’s not the overspending that they object to, but the program itself. If the program meets their social agenda it’s worth investing in. If, like the military, it does not, then funding must be drastically cut or eliminated. Liberals; i.e. Libs have a very shaky and relativistic moral compass at best. It changes as the winds blow.

It all comes down to this. No matter how well you slice and dice an issue, no matter the words you use, how well you dress it up in pretty wrapping paper and a bow and no matter color of the lipstick you put on a sow, it’s still a pig. If you want a government that knows best how to spend your money and who will choose who deserves it more than you and a government that’s narcissistic enough to believe it can create winners and losers through interventionist policies, than vote for Keynesian economics and left wing politicians like Oboma. Vote for politicians who will increasingly confiscate you hard earned money, take your freedoms away and will create a more “fair more just society”. Vote for a society that creates a huge dependency class of underachievers waiting for next handout or government credit card voucher. Vote for Socialism, Fascism, Eugenics, Utopia, Nirvana and a dream. Just remember these four things; Robespierre was guillotined by his own people, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, there is no free lunch and watch what you wish for. You may just get it.

[circlecity]

As Roman senator Cicero noted over two thousand years ago, “the more corrupt a government the more laws it passes.”

[mjp]

Never mind that these misguided and ill-conceived programs have produced great pain and misery.

But these programs make libtards feel good about themselves because they think that they are helping the poor and hurting the rich.

[AMP1]

Yes. It’s all about feelings and not real world outcomes. The Libs mask themselves in beneficent outpouring of good will while they, many times, destroy what they profess to love. It is a narcissism that knows no bounds. It is a belief that they are smarter, better looking and generally better than anyone else and is the natural outcome of the stupid self-esteem movement.

Thanks for the reply.