South Park Speaks the Truth About “The Economy”

As I watched the spot-on parody of all-things “economy” and “bailout” on a recent South Park episode (see preview scenes and/or the whole episode here: http://www.southparkstudios.com/), I found myself thinking: Rush Limbaugh was right. Obama’s failures might be what the country really needs to see the foolishness of big government.

I didn’t agree with Limbaugh when he said it. I thought it was borderline un-patriotic – the same kind of unfair treatment that Republican-controlled government has received from the left, i.e. “I’m only proud of America, and only want good for America, when it’s run by liberals/Democrats.”

But a brilliant and funny cartoon television show has actually helped me see an angle on Rush’s inflammatory statement that makes sense. You see, I think we need to be starkly reminded of how clumsy, oafish and insulting big government can be before we can reject it in the next election cycle.

For those who haven’t seen the episode, “Margaritaville,” it is a comedic exploration of just how darned ridiculous Washington, D.C.’s handling of “The Economy” looks right now. One plot line portrays the development of a religious cult whose leader speaks of “The Economy” as if it were a deity whom we have deeply offended and are now suffering its vengeance. Meanwhile, another plot has us following one character (Stan) as he tries to return his father’s “Margaritaville” margarita-mixing machine for cash – an effort which takes him from mall store “Sur la Table,” all the way to the Treasury Department in Washington. Once inside the grand government building, Stan discovers that bailout decisions are, in fact, being made by cutting off a chicken’s head and waiting for the headless bird to run around and collapse on a giant game board that says things like “Socialize it,” “Bailout,” or “Try again.”

Watching the headless-chicken-bingo scene at the fictional Treasury Department was the moment where I thought, my goodness, this illustrates the very real, growing perception of how these huge decisions are being made. Tim Geithner might be the chicken. He even kind of looks like a chicken.

As is the style of all South Park episodes, the ultimate wisdom comes from the mouths of babes when one of the kids, Kyle, explains to his friends that the economy is not a deity, it’s not even a singular thing; it is, instead, an aggregate of all of us, all of our work, all of our spending, all of our businesses and investments.

Which is, well, correct.

This blinding glimpse of the obvious makes the worshippers of “The Economy” look ridiculous, kind of like the Wall-Street-worshipping turds and nerds we see on cable news who babble on about “the economy” without ever recognizing its complexity. Kyle’s simple truth also makes the fictional chicken-bingo game look like a rather accurate representation of the decision-making process in Washington of late.

The collective wisdom of the American people – let’s call it common sense – is simply bound to eventually conclude that relying on a select few mortals in Washington is a really foolish way of saving the economy. We are bound to grow tired of their silly games and turn back to what we know works: our own hard work, our own persistence (not the president’s), and our own innovation. We’re bound to take more of an interest in the things we can control ourselves – our own family’s budget, the budget of our small business if we own one – and turn away from the circus act that’s going on under the big top in Washington.

The more that Obama, Reid and Pelosi tread with heavy, expensive steps on American wallets and independence, the more we’ll miss the successful feeling of handling things on our own. We’re an independent lot, after all.

So Rush may have been right. Obama’s failures might just be the thing that re-ignites the spark of independence – the spark that we clearly need to once again make the city on the hill that is America shine on its own once again.

The Health Care Come-On

American taxpayers, right now, are a little bit like a young woman who regrets going a bit “too far” with the wrong guy. As we smooth our collective hair and tuck in our collective blouse, backing gently away from the grabby, greedy federal government, we are probably still hoping for a gesture of caring and genuine affection. Perhaps we think it might come in the form of more affordable health care, making up for the mauling we’ve suffered from bailing out the financial industry.

At this moment, I can only tell taxpayers what I’ve told many young female friends: Girls, be sharp and keep your clothes on.

Here are a few tips to at least de-coding the health-care come-ons that are likely to come out of Washington, DC in the coming months:

1. Don’t fall for the phrase “reform the American health-care system.” We don’t have a health-care system in the U.S. We have a health-care marketplace where insurance, medical services, and pharmaceuticals are bought and sold. Government spending, taxation and regulation impact this marketplace profoundly. A politician that boldly promises to reform “the system” needs to explain him or herself a little more fully. Don’t let them get away with this kind of smooth talk. You’re too smart for that. Ask questions, seek specifics on taxation, regulation and spending.

2. Don’t fall for the big spender; he’s going to stick you with the tab, and his plan isn’t necessarily going to work. Much like efforts to improve education, spending more taxpayer dollars has failed to solve our various health-care problems. So listen to four-star-restaurant-level spending proposals as you would listen to a salesman – after all, you’re paying for this date.

3. “I want what’s good for you, baby,” the “consumer.” Addressing you as a consumer is some sweet, caring, empowering talk. But do you really feel like a consumer? Honestly? Have you ever comparative-price-shopped for a doctor, a diagnostic test, or a prescription? Maybe you’d like to become a consumer. Maybe you’d like to buy your own health insurance or your own medical goods and services. And that’s fine. That would be empowering. But don’t believe that they respect your rights as a consumer before they actually let you become one.

One final piece of advice that applies to girlfriends and taxpayers alike: take a second look at the nerds. They can be better for us.

If a geeky politician, for example, starts talking about the “tax treatment of employer-provided health insurance,” your eyes may start to glaze over. But fight it! The tax treatment of health insurance is actually at the root of most of our health-care problems.

Ever wondered why we rely on our employers for insurance? It’s a tax answer. Here’s a short primer so that the nerd talk might more sense:

Employers can buy health insurance with pre-tax dollars, while individuals have to buy it with money that has already had a bite taken out of it by taxes. The difference in price paid is staggering – and flatly unfair.

Okay, so WHY do employers get this break that individuals don’t? Well, it’s an accident of history. During World War II, there were caps on wages and employers had to find different ways to reward and attract employees. They started offering health insurance as part of compensation packages. Congress later thought that practice was quite nice and should be rewarded – and they used their favorite reward-and-punishment tool, the tax code, to show their approval. The rest, as they say, is history.

So if the geek-y politician or pundit on TV talks about the “tax treatment” of employer-sponsored health insurance, listen up. A nerd can be insightful, and that can be very attractive. He is also likely to be a very respectful date. He’ll let you keep your shirt.

Are we calling it BonusGate yet?

Are we calling it BonusGate yet? Ugly, ugly stuff. Will the taxpayers ever know justice? So far, we’ve only gotten half-truths, lies, avoidance and finger pointing (the blaming of Treasury career civil servants by a Treasury spokesman yesterday was a particularly low point, don’t you agree?). Meanwhile, AIG executives – both those who have the gall to keep their bonuses and those who have the class to return them – are all wealthy. They were, they are and they will be.

Here’s an idea to get those executives closer to feeling the pain of being “one of us” – the rank and file taxpayers who don’t make millions of dollars a year. This might get the healing going once the last ounce of political and taxpayer blood has been drawn and dried on this terrible incident:

The Treasury department should put the executives of AIG on the federal government’s general schedule pay scale – the “GS Scale..” These folks are, after all, now government employees. They are paid by the taxpayers, just like the rest of the professionals at the Treasury Department.

Each executive can look up what their pay might be right here on the U.S. Office of Personnel Management website:
http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/indexGS.asp

Don’t be too discouraged, AIG guys and gals: the government also offers merit bonuses, known to sometimes be four figures for exemplary performance! Welcome to your life as a public servant. The joy of knowing that you serve the taxpayers will outweigh the pay-cut in due time, I am sure.

-Jean Card

Hey! Feds! Get off of my cloud.

Submitted by ASO member: Jean Card

Here’s a bit of inspiring news for anyone who is feeling a little bit smothered by the big-government creepiness that is Washington, DC these days: many state governments are re-asserting their rights under the 10th amendment! Check out this story, complete with the language of the amendment.

This is a state government’s way of saying, to their counterparts (not bosses) in Washington: “Hey, I know the constitution was written a long time ago, so you may need a little reminder… that you are supposed to have limited powers! The states are sovereign. Got it? Get off of our cloud, man.”

I’m inspired. I hope the feds get off of my cloud soon, too.

I'm just not that into you.

I’m just not that into you.

I’m weary of reading about all the provisions in the stimulus/spending bill. It makes my stomach hurt in that angry-but-helpless way. I’m irritated by politicians of all stripes who think they should decide how MY money is spent and how MY life should be lived.

So, I want to tell the leaders in Washington, DC, en masse:

“I’m just not that into you.

“I mean, I know you mean well, or you think you mean well. And I’m sure that some countries would be thrilled to have you as their significant other. But, honestly, you just make me feel smothered. Please stop calling me and asking for more money. Please stop promising to do things for me when it seems like I’m always the one paying the bill. Stop boasting about the decisions you’re making to change my life. I don’t think my life is so bad!

“I’m really looking for a government that isn’t in my face all the time. A government that gives me my space. One that respects my individuality and ideas. One that doesn’t judge me or talk down to me. But you… you aren’t that government. So. I’m sorry, but I’m just not that into you.”

Submitted by ASO member: Jean Card

Tax Cuts: Not the Problem

Okay. I have an issue with the ongoing implication by the president that it was tax cuts that got us “where we are today.” Here’s what he said in his weekly address over the weekend:

“Let's be clear: We can't expect relief from the tired old theories that, in eight short years, doubled the national debt, threw our economy into a tailspin, and led us into this mess in the first place. We can't rely on a losing formula that offers only tax cuts as the answer to all our problems…"

In contrast, I’ll just offer what I think is a better explanation of “how we got here” from the president’s own Treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, in his speech yesterday..

“I want to explain how we got here. The causes of the crisis are many and complex. They accumulated over time, and will take time to resolve.Governments and central banks around the world pursued policies that, with the benefit of hindsight, caused a huge global boom in credit, pushing up housing prices and financial markets to levels that defied gravity.

Investors and banks took risks they did not understand. Individuals, businesses, and governments borrowed beyond their means. The rewards that went to financial executives departed from any realistic appreciation of risk.

There were systematic failures in the checks and balances in the system, by Boards of Directors, by credit rating agencies, and by government regulators. Our financial system operated with large gaps in meaningful oversight, and without sufficient constraints to limit risk. Even institutions that were overseen by our complicated, overlapping system of multiple regulators put themselves in a position of extreme vulnerability.

These failures helped lay the foundation for the worst economic crisis in generations.

When the crisis began, governments around the world were too slow to act... When action came, it was late and inadequate. Policy was always behind the curve, always chasing the escalating crisis. As the crisis intensified and more dramatic government action was required, the emergency actions meant to provide confidence and reassurance too often added to public anxiety and to investor uncertainty.

The dramatic failure or near-failure of some of the world's largest financial institutions, and the lack of clear criteria and conditions applied to government interventions caused investors to pull back from taking risk.”

This is complicated, yes, but more accurate and therefore more responsible than the cheap-shot implication that tax cuts caused the current recession.

I think that Geithner stayed away from the Obama implication that tax cuts are to blame because he knows that our current situation has nothing to do with tax cuts – because tax cuts aren’t bad. They are good. They help stimulate the economy, especially when they are given to job creators like small businesses!

I give Geithner credit for mentioning small business several times in his speech, too. I’m glad they are being remembered when it comes to access to credit.

See this link for more specifics (i.e. a payroll tax holiday and increased expensing) on how to help the economy by helping small business.

Submitted by ASO member: Jean Card

Apparently it’s not hip to be square

When I read this article, I was shocked by the behavior of these college students. Perhaps the most disturbing part is that the conservative students say this is a pattern – they feel that liberal students are trying to intimidate them, to suppress their freedom of speech. I hope the students who defaced the crosses think about how their own actions can, in fact, threaten open and honest discourse. I hope that they think about how they would feel if their own political or religious statements were so severely mocked, vandalized.

Sadly, while I read this piece I also found myself thinking, “Why would those kids – the conservatives/Republicans – even advertise that they are conservatives in the first place? Don’t they know how they’ll get hazed for it?”

You see, I, myself, did not tell people that I was a conservative when I was in college (in the early 1990s). I knew that I might be mocked for it, so I kept my political views to myself. I later referred to the moment that I told friends about my party affiliation (in the spring of my senior year, when I was less concerned about my reputation!) as my conservative-coming-out-of-the-closet.

What does this all mean? Are young people increasingly intolerant of views from the right? If that’s true, we’re in big trouble. How can we have healthy debate if only one perspective is represented? A variety of ideas is what makes America great.

Submitted by ASO member: Jean Card

The Stimulus Package – designed by worshippers of government

Check out this editorial from the Wall Street Journal on the so-called stimulus package: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html

I don’t know about you, but reading this kind of breakdown of what’s in that beast made me a little sick to my stomach. It looks to me like this bill was written by people who really love government, who think government solves all problems, and don’t have a clue about how the free-market economy works.

We are still a free-market economy, right? Gulp. Right?

Submitted by ASO member: Jean Card