Skip to comments.A Cynical Process: Part II (Thomas Sowell on Obama's reelection)
Posted on 04/30/2012 2:09:34 PM PDT by jazusamo
A small headline in the 2nd section of the Wall Street Journal last week told a bigger story than a lot of front page banner headlines. It said, "U.S. Firms Add Jobs, but Mostly Overseas."
Just as there is no free lunch, there is no free class warfare. Some people may be inspired by President Obama's talk about making "the rich" pay their undefined "fair share" of taxes, or taking away corporations' "tax breaks." But talk is not always cheap. It can be very costly to those working people who are looking for jobs that the Obama administration's anti-business policies are driving overseas.
According to the Wall Street Journal, "Thirty-five big U.S.-based multinational companies added jobs much faster than other U.S. employers in the past two years, but nearly three-fourths of those jobs were overseas." All these companies have at least 50,000 employees, so we are talking about a lot of jobs for foreigners with American companies overseas.
If the Wall Street Journal can figure this out, it seems certain that the President of the United States has economic advisers who can figure out the same thing. But that does not mean that the president is interested in the same thing.
In this, as in so much else, Barack Obama is interested in Barack Obama. Whatever bad effects his policies may have for others, those policies have had a track record of political success for many politicians in many places.
To put it bluntly, killing the goose that lays the golden egg is a viable political strategy, provided the goose doesn't die before the next election. In this case, the goose simply lays its golden eggs somewhere else, so there is no political danger to President Obama.
Unemployment may remain a problem to many Americans, but that only provides another occasion for the Obama administration to show its "compassion" with extended unemployment benefits, more food stamps and various interventions to save home buyers from mortgage foreclosure. This can easily be a winning political strategy.
Franklin D. Roosevelt won his biggest landslide victory after his first term in office, during which the unemployment rate was never less than twice what it has been under Barack Obama.
The "smart money" inside the Beltway says that a high unemployment rate spells doom at the polls for a president. But history says that people who are getting government handouts tend to vote for whoever is doing the handing out.
The Obama administration has turned this into a handout state that breaks all previous records. Lofty rhetoric about "stimulus," "shovel-ready projects," "green jobs" or "investment" in "the industries of the future" all give political cover to what is plain old handouts to people who are likely to vote to re-elect Obama.
At the local level as well, history shows that some of the most successful politicians have been people who ruined the local economy and chased job-creating businesses away. Mayor Coleman Young of Detroit in the 1970s and 1980s was not worried when affluent whites began moving out of the city in response to his policies, because they were people who were likely to vote against him if they stayed.
Of course they took their taxes, their investment money and the jobs they created with them. But that was Detroit's problem, not Coleman Young's problem. Barack Obama may win re-election by turning the United States into Detroit writ large.
Something similar happened in earlier times, when James Michael Curley served 4 terms as mayor of Boston, and 2 terms in prison. As the non-Irish left the city, in response to Curley's policies, that increased Curley's likelihood of being re-elected.
This kind of cynical politics is even more likely to succeed when political opponents fail to articulate their case to the public. And Republicans are notorious for neglecting articulation.
The phrase "tax cuts for the rich" has been repeated endlessly by Democrats without one Republican that I know of saying, "Folks, I don't lie awake at night worrying about millionaires' tax problems. Millionaires have lawyers and accountants who get paid to do that. But I do worry about jobs being lost to millions of American workers because we make the business climate here worse than in other countries. That's a high price to pay for rhetoric."
The case can be made. But somebody has to make the case.
Sowell gets it.
It’s just tragic that Dr Sowell couldn’t have been the first black President; instead we get a Marxist POS.
I almost never disagree with Thomas Sowell but this sentence, “Franklin D. Roosevelt won his biggest landslide victory after his first term in office, during which the unemployment rate was never less than twice what it has been under Barack Obama” seems wrong to me. Yes, the REPORTED rate was twice as high under Roosevelt but the ACTUAL rate was probably about the same. What is being reported now grossly understates the true unemployment numbers.
Of course if he'd used a higher rate closer to the real rate the leftists would have screamed bloody murder in their letters to editors.
“They are counting on you to go on, to work to the limit of the inhuman and to feed them while you last — and when you collapse, there will be another victim starting out and feeding them while struggling to survive — and the span of each succeeding victim will be shorter, and while you’ll die to leave them a railroad, your last descendant-in-spirit will die to leave them a loaf of bread. This does not worry the looters of the moment. Their plan — like the plans of all the royal looters of the past — is only that the loot shall last their lifetime.”
Damn, just DAMN, I wish I could articulate as well as this man.
Liberals of felt Unions weren't destroying jobs fast enough - so they decided to 'talk it up'... Seems to be working ... no real recovery...
Thanks for both of those pings to enlightening words from Dr. Sowell jaz. Appreciate it.
Man...I sure hope the Mr. Sowell's subconscious is not saying that he thinks Obama is going to win in November.
With Mit (commie lite) as the nominee, I believe the battle has moved to the House and Senate. Hopefully we can get enough true conservatives elected to keep Obama from hurting this country any more than he already has (should he win), or to force Romny to at least pretend to be a conservative (should he win).
simple, and possibly effective...
Sure, if you forgot how Republicans made themselves vulnerable to the Buffet rule attack.
Sure Americans don't care how much the rich pay in taxes when their own taxes are going down and their middle class benefits are going up AT THE SAME TIME. That is why GWB did that very thing.
But in 2011 the new Republicans congress (and partially baited by Obama) started trying to tell voters that the country cant afford those middle class benefits indefinitely because of the rising deficit ,and dont forget the FICA tax battle.
Only in an imaginary world of some talk radio shows will voters support losing their own entitlements while Rush and Buffet get their taxes cut. And the legacy of GWB was hardly helpful in showing that every rich guy's tax cut makes the average voter richer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.