[MD] Who are the MOQ's best friends?

[Michael R. Brown]

Hi, Dan Glover -

> GWB stole two elections

Two, even. Wasn't it three? Or seventeen? Or all since the dawn of time? 
Amazing how the power of Bush knows no end. I remember talking to a liberal 
acquaintance 2007 and he frightenedly spoke of Bush "not consenting to 
leave" the Presidency. That's all that it would take, apparently.

> took a multi-trillion dollar budget surplus

There was no such thing. It was created by accounting trickery. If the 
Federal Government operated under  the regulations it insists that business 
operate under to remain sustainable - GAAP - it would have been amortizing 
its colossal unfunded future liabilities since they started to accumulate in 
the 1960s. (Social security was, as we see, also based upon trickery. 
Various "haters of the poor" have been warning about this since its 
inception, but since they "hated the poor" they were disregarded.) It hasn't 
been amortizing its liabilities, and we are starting to see the magnitude of 
the economic catastrophe slowly descending upon us. The government fesses up 
to $62trillion in unfunded liabilities; some economists bruit about 
$120trillion. And there's more yet, hidden in the system. Military spending 
is a pipsqueak, a nothing, compared to the destruction entitlements, 
pensions, etc. will wreak upon us if the issue is not dealt with now. It's 
already actually too late, because people's ability *and motivation* to save 
has been eroded by fiat currency. But some of the damage can be averted.

In the U.S. of the later 19th century, while more or less on a genuine gold 
standard, amid the Second Industrial Revolution and with millions of 
immigrants pouring in, the real cost of goods steadily declined over a 
multi-decade period. That's right. Cash was an *appreciating* asset, lending 
was constrained, capital costs were stable, and technological and material 
progress relative to preceding decades was phenomenal. Unfortunately, this 
negatively impacted farmers and gave rise to economic Progressivism, which 
eventually began to adulterate the system. Woodrow Wilson was a truly 
catastrophic President, and for far more than his racism.

> turned it into a multi-trillion dollar budget deficit

Bush43 is no more the king than Obama44 is. The House of Representatives is 
constitutionally vested with responsibility for the budget.

> two needless wars in deserts half-way

Which he overrode Congress to conduct? And which were contrary to the stated 
policy of the U.S.? And Saddam had not violated a peace treaty, which 
*granted* him a cessation of hostilities under certain conditions?

> by giving billionaires enormous tax breaks

Emperor Palpa-Bush again. Congress should have cut them - and all subsidies 
and loopholes - still more until a flat tax resulted. Or a sales-only tax, 
better yet. Progressive taxation is a positive evil and hurts the poor the 
most, because it discourages venture capital investment, which drives 
innovation and job mobility. The rich still pay a ridiculous amount in taxes 
into the inefficient energy structure known as the Federal Government, and 
more and more people are paying no income tax at all. The thing to do is to 
cut the spending and entitling and regulating madnesses, then get the 
country back onto real money and off of paper.

>  it's all Obama's fault.

It's no more O44's fault than B43's fault. The system has been heading in 
this direction since at latest the founding of the Fed and the passing of 
the 17th Amendment. These are just the consequences, long-predicted by crazy 
Austrian-economics people like the present writer.


MRB
http://www.fuguewriter.com