The Real Presidential Choice Facing the United States

The loud, cacophonous, clamoring back and forth has only just begun. The candidates of the two main parties will be speaking in opposing terms battling each other on every possible subject exaggerating even the slightest crevice of a difference until it rivals the Grand Canyon. We can expect full-throttle vindictive salvos to be thrown by the Super-PACs even should either candidate choose to stay positive and avoid personal attacks. This coming election has the potential to be the most contentious in recent history if not in all of history. Putting it in the most basic terms possible, we can safely predict that either side has no plans on taking any prisoners and go straight for the jugular of the opponent aiming to render them broken beyond repair if not simply and utterly destroyed. So, what will be the issues most likely to be the main themes of the election and which one will be the singularly most vital question voters will need to address.

The most obvious issues according to the press coverage they are receiving are jobs, taxes, unemployment, the economy, gas prices, and the disparities concerning Warren Buffet versus his secretary. As important as all of these issues may be, they will very likely prove to be secondary when the judgment of history is written some time much later in the century. The underlying theme between the candidates on each of these contentious issues will be the role of government should play in finding the solution. One side will place great importance on the steps the government must take to assure that the people are given the tools to solve any difficulties they are facing while the other candidate will stress getting government out of the way and allowing people to empower themselves without government meddlesome interference. The two sides will argue on which is more advantageous, making the wealthy pay their “fair share” in taxation such that the government will have sufficient funds in order to address and solve the problems the people are facing while on the other hand the argument made claims that allowing the wealthy and everybody else to keep more of their wealth by lowering tax rates so those who are the engines that generate the jobs, such as small businesses, have the additional funds to enable them to invest and employ more people. These themes will be the foundation beneath the discussion on other subjects as well.

Take health-care and health insurance, both of which promise to be a hot potato for both candidates, and again the discourse will revolve around how much responsibility should be granted to the government and how much should remain with the individual. How this particular debate plays out will be of great interest as President Obama can reasonably claim that he molded Obama-care using Romney-care as the prototypical guide. Romney will stress that at least Romney-care was Constitutional as it was a state program while Obama-care is not Constitutional being a Federal program and thus against the limitations placed on the Federal Government by the Constitution. For many in the electorate it will be required of Romney that he convinces them he had a turning point on the idea of government getting so fully involved with health-care thus placing distance between his current position and the position allowing him to sign the Massachusetts Health-Care Insurance Reform Law.

Another subject will be the balance between oil, coal, nuclear, natural gas and green energies which will ensure a sufficient supply for the future while also improving the environment. This will also revolve around the role of government regulations, licensing, involvement and promotion in each of these forms of energy generation. What will be of particular interest on this subject is whether either candidate will have a singular position and remains consistent on their message when talking to the different audiences. Will their position ring with the same message when they are speaking in Texas as when they are talking energy in San Francisco. This is something that both extremes on this issue from the coal and oil workers and the strident environmentalists should be interested and both candidates should be fully vetted and revealed if their message is overly adjustable and tailored for the separate audiences. Energy policies are often a good indicator with which to test the honor and honesty of candidates as the wide gulch between the two extremes between differing audiences provides temptation for candidates to adjust their rhetoric tailoring the message to fit the audience thus proposing contradictory positions at different times.

But what is the seminal issue of this coming Presidential election? When looking at each issue it becomes obvious that even more than has been the historic norm, the role of government in our lives and in all segments of society are going to be the central theme. We are faced with a significant difference between the two candidates. The choice is whether we desire to restore government to the restraints of a limiting Constitution or if we wish to transform the way we interpret our Constitution towards making government proactive by removing the limitations over the role of the Federal government. Will we choose to restructure the United States by dismissing Constitutional constraints or reestablish a restrictive Constitutionally limited governance United States? This is the choice in the starkest of terms with which to demonstrate our choice when we enter the voting booth this November. Either we retain the guards against unlimited government power or transit to a government that can dictate every item in our lives. We will be choosing whether we place the individual over the government or place the government to be preeminent over the individual. Which one do you trust to make all the choices going forward, each individual person with the rights and responsibilities for their own actions or the bureaucratic governance making the choices taking the responsibility for all consequences and doling out rights as they find necessary. Do we desire the responsibility derived from individual liberty or the comfort of simple compliance derived from communal group-think?

Beyond the Cusp

What Will Make America Great?

After the recent downgrade in the credit rating of the United States by Standards and Poor’s from AAA to AA+ but retaining the negative future outlook, I guess it is time for the follow-up article to “What Made America Great?” Right now there is no shortage of people claiming the times of a preeminent America are over and all that is left is to watch as America declines and is eventually laid to rest. I am sure there were those who made this same mistake during the 1930s and the Great Depression. There is an urban legend of this type of thinking which claims that Charles H. Duell, who was Commissioner of the United States Patent Office in 1899, resigned claiming that, “Everything that can be invented has been invented.” He obviously lacked the imagination which blinded his ability to imagine even greater inventions to come in the future. America will need to ignore such attitudes and simply pick herself up, maybe let out a sigh, and then get back to doing what made America great, working smart as well as hard. This time smart may be far more important than hard, but dedication and setting seemingly impossible goals are among the things America’s future must hold if she is to, like the Phoenix, rise from the ashes. Well, that may be a bit too drastic an analogy as America is still the preeminent world power and is still unrivaled in virtually every field, so it is more like getting back up to speed after an overly slow, disorganized, costly pit stop.

The rejuvenation of the economic engine that has proven to be the greatest producer of wealth and progress ever known to man, must first be released from the restraints and governors limiting the free spinning of invention and removing the sludge of years upon years of stifling tax code bandaged beyond recognition and removing the regulation clogged filters restricting the flow of fuel all of which have limited its output. America is not suffering from a lack of intelligent, determined, and dedicated workers. What America needs to first realize is the need to be provided with new sources of inexpensive energy independent from foreign control, boycotts or other restrictions beyond American control. This means developing every source of domestically provided energy, be that fossil fuels, green energy, nuclear power, or sources yet to be invented or discovered. Research and development of so-called green energy is important but the immediate solution is still fossil fuel based with nuclear power being the next energy source that can be brought on-line. Green energy is the power of the future and we need to plan to meet that future and not rely solely upon the sources of energy we currently utilize. Then we need to revive our stricken infrastructure. Some of it simply is in need of repair, some needs to be replaced and all of it could benefit from upgrades.

President Obama’s love affair with high speed trains is not entirely a bad idea. Trying to place these high speed trains on the same tracks as our commercial trains is a bad idea for a number of reasons. The most obvious is that the old rail systems would limit top speeds to under 120 MPH, which is not exactly my idea of high speed rail. We would need an entire new rail system which would be best built on an as economically feasible and done as much as possible by private industry. The initial placement of such a rail system would be between San Diego up through Los Angeles on to San Francisco. The other location where such systems may be profitable would be from Washington D C through the coastal cities to the northeast. Until we can produce a rail system that is capable of speeds that would allow trains to rival the convenience of air travel with an equal or superior safety record predicted, this will not be possible. The most promising system would utilize a monorail design powered by electromagnetic Maglev systems. Such a system could be built entirely below ground or a combination of above and below ground rails depending on conditions. The main consideration is to make such a system as fast as plane travel and considerably less expensive with the profits coming from volume which is the main strength of rail systems for transporting people from one point to another. Plus, replacing a large amount of domestic plane flights in our most crowded airspace would be a desirable objective. But such train fantasies are in the future. As the saying goes, you have to walk before you get on a Maglev.

Americans have been known worldwide for ingenuity even if one of our Patent Office Commissioners did possibly say that we had run out of new idea and all inventions were already invented. What we need is very simply for government to allow the freedom for people to dream and then live that dream and not be required to fill out forms and rules that eventually squash all the inventiveness out of even the most ingenious minds. Government, with all the regulations, bureaucrats and other blockades to productive and free enterprise is strangling the inventiveness and risk taking out of America. We need to refrain government, not people. The time has come to simplify, better to totally revamp the tax code and place a sunshine limit on all regulations so that they must be reconsidered by Congress periodically. If nothing else, forcing Congress to review all the old regulations should hopefully prevent them making new ones for quite a while. We need also to make it that only our representatives are allowed to make regulations and not some government pencil pushing careerist trying to make things impossible without their position to assist and guarantee his employment. Simply put, it is time to tell Washington, “Enough!” And this time we really mean it.

We need to push enough and support new faces and fresh ideas, especially the idea that American are still not simply a can do but a will do nation and all we need is to be allowed the freedom and opportunity to show and we will produce miracles. For my entire life I have watched as the world in the United States has slowly but inexorably closed in and shut down removing one freedom after another until America is slowly becoming unrecognizable. It is going to sound silly, but I want my old America back, with a few adjustments as we all know not everything was right, but the less regulation was correct. Perhaps we should return that which was great while keeping the progresses made towards a more acceptive and open society, after all, we’re Americans and if we can dream it, we can do it.

Beyond the Cusp

What Could the Powers That Be Do to Jumpstart the Economy?

We watch as Stock Markets Worldwide continue their plunge into the depths of investor despair. Many claim that Government has not taken any of the necessary steps in order to allay fears of a second dip or another bout of recession which is about to hit the economy. This begs the question of what exactly could be suggested that the government might have left in their munitions to spur growth and restore confidence in what has at best been an anemic recovery. The most cynical of pundits fear that the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department have about run out of options. The one thing that both pessimists and many optimists seem to agree is that another round of Quantitative Easing is completely out of the question, especially after the most recent debacle around the debt ceiling being raised and the downgrading by Standards and Poor’s recently of the United States credit rating from AAA to AA+ yet continuing their negative outlook of the future. This makes the need for something either radically innovative or massively relieving doubts and negative pressures on the economy be found if any hope is to be garnered from any action. The one constant is that whatever affects the American economy will have effects upon European economies and beyond.

Continuing with this logic, energizing the American economy would have the added bonus of spurring some optimism in the languishing economies of Europe and give a reassuring jolt to the rest of the world that America was back on track. Even those countries who may not have the greatest love for America still desire healthy purchasing power generated by American consumerism over lagging production from lacking sales driving their economies downward. So, for argument’s sake, what is it that is the greatest impediment to the American economy? What is the one indicator that most represents the laziness of the engine behind the American economy? My best guess would be the nine percent average unemployment that has been consistent for going on two years with no relief on the horizon. So, what is the main impediment to opening up more opportunities and spurring an urgency to hire more employees? There are a number of postulations all of which have the common trait of uncertainty. Whether it is uncertainty of future sales, uncertainty of employee costs, uncertainty of taxes going higher, uncertainty of new onerous regulations, just plain uncertainty, it all adds up to a nervousness in business that makes expansion or even replacement hiring fraught with insecurities that tends to force cautious decision-making causing a form of malaise. So, emerging as a main reason behind our shaky economy is a fear of an unpredictable future where the rules and costs may tend to fluctuate sharply due to any number of unpredictable variables. Note these variables are unpredictable, not unknown, and there lies the solutions.

One of the unknowns looming over too many American employers is the unimplemented, often still to be designed and fleshed out with untold accompanying regulations, agencies, bureaucrats, and enforcement mechanisms, fines, and related fees, potential monster of government known as Obama Care. Sure, the thousand plus page legislation has been enacted, but it is a skeleton with much of what it will entail yet to be formed. Obama Care is full of phrases that infer to be determined by the Secretary of HHS or to be determined by this one and that one or group with fines and fees still to be determined while not even fully defining exactly what insurances are to be required or excluded under the full implementation and complications of the law itself. This leaves a huge unknown of the potential costs of existing employees, let alone new ones. This has frozen many companies and corporations from opening new plants or offices and hiring the assorted personnel. Currently, many employers are only replacing essential personnel and leaving positions open should people leave their current position. Repealing Obama Care would very likely spur a large surge in hiring and take a good sized bite out of unemployment.

There is a group who also point to the ever extended unemployment insurance being offered as another reason behind the lingering higher rate of unemployment. They are followers of the theory of “you get what you pay for” and claim the government is paying for unemployment so it is getting unemployed people. Now, I am fairly sure that this is not responsible for a large segment of the unemployed, but on the other hand there must be some amount of truth behind this theory. Those who have high paying skills are less likely to remain on unemployment any longer than absolutely necessary as they lose money for every day they are not working at their given profession. On the other hand, there may be some for whom unemployment is approximately equal to what salary they can expect to receive if they returned to the job market. From my own experiences when I was younger and possibly more foolish, I know that if you lost a job that you were hired at minimum wage but had worked your way up and were making somewhat more than minimum and were released for any reason, the latest downturn could easily have caused such for many as it did in the 1970s, returning to work would merely produce starting again at the bottom collecting minimum wages which makes unemployment possibly a higher pay-rate than working, thus it may be logical to wait until close to end of benefits before seeking employment. This is just a simple and possibly silly possibility.

Add on top of these the facts, there still exists the possibility that President Obama may still manage to get some of his other pet projects enacted such as some form of carbon tax or energy tax, either of which could make heavy demands of industry and all forms of enterprise. Add the seeming constant attempts by the Obama Administration to desire to raise taxes on the wealthy, meaning anybody making more than the President, or on certain industries which would cause increased costs to ripple across the entire employment picture. Threats to further regulate power companies; threats to make the reliance on coal for energy prohibitively expensive; the seeming complete refusal to allow exploration for new oil reserves, especially off shore oil platforms; the refusal to allow the building of an oil pipeline to connect to the Canadian oil-sands production to refineries within the United States; and any other forms of the reflexive revulsion towards all use of fossil fuels coupled with the desire to drive their cost so high that renewable energy become more attractive have all combined to scare the living daylights out of many in corporate America. Taking steps to relieve these fears and assure those who provide the jobs that they are not about to be ambushed from any and every side by government would go a long way to freeing up the economic engine and returning America to fiscal health. Taking such reassuring steps would probably drive the economy to a point that tax revenues would increase sufficiently to satisfy President Obama keeping him from pushing for higher or new taxes. Who am I kidding; nothing would prevent him from his tax the rich and give to the poor unfortunates, government employees of course. For a moment I forgot who we were dealing with, please excuse my lapse as it is too late to go back and correct the whole article.

Beyond the Cusp