Change

Barack Obama promised “hope and change” when he ran for president. Once elected, he did institute change ... lots of change ... change that favored immigrants, the greenies, China, Russia, the Ukraine, Muslim countries and those south of the US border. But never came through with the “hope” part. When Trump took over, he too has changed things ... mostly by reversing those damaging Democrat policies.

So why were Obama’s changes so readily accepted and Trump’s so vehemently resisted?

May I suggest that Obama’s changes advantaged those above-noted third parties while disadvantaging the unaware American middle class. Trump’s changes have mostly reversed these Obama wealth and hegemony flows.

And the resisters to this change are the environmentalists, globalists, media, Deep State and some foreign governments ... all whom had benefitted under Obama’s reign.

Middle Americans sense this u-turn and the resulting relief to their political frustrations. This is why Trump’s rallies are overflowing and why he will likely be re-elected with a larger electoral margin than he received in 2016. Americans will not be whipsawed once again with re-heated Democrat give-aways.

Headlines

John Ratcliff won’t be Trump’s next national intelligence director

Perfect storm building for stock correction as trade war simmers and market awaits more Fed action

Record 157,288,000 employed

Peter Thiel slams Google for sharing AI technology with China

Lawyers spar over secrecy for Facebook emails on Cambridge Analytica

How decades of US sanctions decimated Iran’s economy

Middle class falling deeper into debt ...

Report: Elijah Cummings’ Baltimore house burglarized

Emails show Stephen Miller premed hard to limit green cards

70% of shoes sold in US comes from China. With new tariffs, the industry braces for hit

Florida declares public health emergency over Hepatitis A ... Philly too

U.S. added 164:000 jobs in July

Headlines

Trump hails House Intelligence Committee report on Russia

Why a middleclass lifestyle costs over $300,000 per year

Brennan warns POTUS: 'Stay tuned' ...

Dershowitz: Dems 'willing to give up civil liberties' to get Trump

Judge appoints former judge as Special Master in Micheal Cohen case

Congress approves bill reauthorizing FAA, rejecting GOP's privatization push

ISIS propaganda machine smashed in cyber raid ...

China warns Taiwan: America can't protect you

Korean leaders declare end to the war and 'complete denuclearization'

Kayne West's new song 'Blacks still ain't off the plantation' of being Democrats

French museum discovers half its collection are fakes ...

Facebook bans Pamela Geller again for report on Muslim anti-Semitisn

It's Possible ...

Will the decades that the United States sapped its manufacturing and middle class in order to stimulate economies in lesser-developed countries around the world eventually pay off when these same countries become huge customers for American products and services? This promise certainly was the implication of our previous hurtful yet hopeful trading practises. If this doesn't occur, then we were gigantic suckers. If it does, then we were geniuses.

Which will it be?

Headlines

All from Internet news sites. Guess which from CNBC?

GOP leaders bullish tax bill will pass the House this week

Media Matters using Roy Moore allegations to go after Hannity's advertisers

Hundreds of millionaires are banding together to tell Congress: Raise our taxes

Bears Packers game half empty at Soldier Field ...

Alabama polls show close race after Moore accusations

Remember [acting AG] Sally Yates? She says Trump is 'shamelessly unpatriotic'

Humans traveling to Mars may soon be possible. Whether they can survive the trip is another story.

Bill Gates buys big chunk of land to build 'smart city' ...

Middle class biggest winner in Senate tax plan, study says

Top Dems STILL won't say what should happen to Menendez if he is convicted

Trump bailed on a trade deal, and now a bunch of US businesses may suffer

Politics killing mood at Barcelona's storied sex club ...

Counterpoint

Recently I wrote a blog specifying all the good things that can be said about the United States ... see: Rose-Colored Glasses. However, daily we see media articles that show these advantages often slip-sliding away. To illustrate this I have juxtaposed below, next to my previously-stated advantages, media stories that show the slow dulling of our nation's edges:

We have a capitalism-driven growing economy ... the largest in the world. See: China Overtakes the U.S. as World;s Largest Economy.

We have a plentiful supply of cheap labor to our south ... anxious to experience our American life. See: Donald Trump Was Right.

We have a premier higher-education system ... the envy of the world ... and one which keeps supplying us with gifted entrepreneurs. See: Higher Education -- Not What It Used To Be.

We have the geographic advantage of being isolated from most of the rest of the world by two large oceans. See: How Geography Explains The United States.

We have a very low inflation rate. See: What Official Inflation Figures Aren't Telling Us.

We have a generally benign climate. See: Scientists Warn Sun Will Go To Sleep In 2020, Cause Temperatures To Plummet.

We have a national park system that is the envy of the world. See: Obama Designates More Than 1 Million Acres For Three New Monuments.

We have the world's best health-care professionals and technology. See: Healthcare Is Getting Worse Under Obamacare.                 

Despite continuing declines, we still have an enormous manufacturing capacity. See: Fast Track To Lost Jobs.

We are currently not in a hot war draining our treasury and supply of young people. See: Pentagon Official Lists Militants, Russia and China As Threats To The U.S.

Most crime in this country is on the decline except in a few hot spots. See: Murder Rate Surges In Major U.S. Cities.

We have a democratic-elected government and all the freedoms provided by our Bill of Rights. See: The Constitution Is Eroding.

We are abundantly supplied with raw materials. See: How Putin's Russia Gained Control Of A U.S. Uranium Mine.

We have a stable currency ... the basis of most world-wide commerce. See: Momentum Builds To Label Chinese Yuan A Reserve Currency

We have the strongest military in the world. See: Lawmakers Blast US Army Force Cuts.

We have a very large middle class that supports our democracy and our way of life. See: The Shrinking American Middle Class.

We have an enormously efficient food-supply chain. See: America.s Fragile Food Supply Chain.

We lead the world in most technological advances. See: U.S. Moving From Technology Leader To Laggard.

We still carry a large surplus of prestige with most world governments. See: The Decline Of U.S. Power?

Now you see "the rest of the story."

Rose-Colored Glasses

This blog, like most of the Internet commentary, has a decidedly negative flavor. Not so good ... ergo, I've decided to try, at least for this one post, to walk on the sunny side of the street. One of Ronald Reagan's strong points was that he was always looking at things through rose-colored glasses. And the genius of Barack Obama's first presidential campaign was it slogan, "Hope and Change." Accentuating the positive is almost always the better strategy. People like to feel good ... and therefore they like people who try to make them feel good.

So what is so positive in our lives in America today? We have a capitalism-driven growing economy ... the largest in the world. We have a plentiful supply of cheap labor to our south ... anxious to experience our American life. We have a premier higher-education system ... the envy of the world ... and one which keeps supplying us with gifted entrepreneurs. We have the geographic advantage of being isolated from most of the rest of the world by two large oceans  We have a very low inflation rate. We have a generally benign climate. We have a national park system that is the envy of the world. We have the world's best health-care professionals and technology. Despite continuing declines, we still have an enormous manufacturing capacity.

And we are currently not in a hot war draining our treasury and supply of young people. Most crime in this country is on the decline except in a few hot spots. We have a democratic-elected government and all the freedoms provided by our Bill of Rights. We are abundantly supplied with raw materials. We have a stable currency ... the basis of most world-wide commerce. We have the strongest military in the world. We have a very large middle class that supports our democracy and our way of life. We have an enormously efficient food-supply chain. We lead the world in most technological advances. We still carry a large surplus of prestige with most world governments.

Enough? Feeling better?

Yes, we also have problems ... but I leave these for later comment.

Open Borders

A self-described “super liberal” friend said yesterday that he believed in open borders … no constraints whatsoever on who might enter the United States. This attitude stems, I believe, from equating today’s situation with the waves of immigrants that have historically populated this country and, obviously, made it stronger. To me this is a false equivalence for a number of reasons:

1)     Past legal immigration was closely monitored to keep out aliens that had contagious diseases. Our former federal processing centers on the east and west coast would send such individuals back home or quarantine them until they were deemed safe to be released into the general population. Even illegal immigrants, once caught, would be so processed. Today the Obama administration is threatening doctors who raise the specter of such a public health crises as a result of this new wave of unprocessed illegal immigrants … see: Fox News Story.

If we were to have open borders, not only would we surely suffer a number of such epidemics, but we also would be inundated with dangerous plant, animal and insect invaders brought into our country under such uncontrolled circumstances. Imagine the Asian jumping carp or the winter moth times a thousand!

2)     In past times, immigrants of all stripes were expected to be self reliant and not go on the public dole. In fact existing U.S. citizens were required to guarantee in writing that this would not occur. Today, given the monumental growth of the welfare state, no such checks exist. The pull of free money and free high-quality health care is what draws many illegal and legal immigrants to this country… see: Breitbart Story.

If our Social Security System is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, how will it pay for millions more foreigners who never contributed a penny, yet are or will be receiving its benefits? And, if we don’t have enough doctors to treat our returning veterans, how in heaven’s name are we going to minister to the influx of all of the world’s infirmed who can make it to our shores?

3)     The United States has awoken, as a result of the 9/11 World Trade Center heinous attack, to the dangers of international terrorism, particularly that of radical Islam. Open borders would virtually guarantee that we would be inundated with such bad apples wishing to establish a caliphate here … and lop off the head of anyone who objects. I guess my liberal friend thinks that, he, being of an age, would escape unharmed … but I doubt if his progeny would.

4)     In the past, America was a "melting pot" for the millions of our immigrants. Today, this country is not assimilating immigrants to the same degree that it once did. There are now many communities of transnationals which have established themselves as microcosms of their native land. Newer Internet and television technology has enabled them to never learn English nor adapt to the American culture … even after multiple generations. (Islamic honor killings still occur in this country on a regular basis.) Yes, this diversity can enrich American culture, but the reverse is also true … if it were allowed or even forced to happen.

5)     Last point … a tsunami of immigrants into the U.S. would have an incalculable impact on the economics of both this country and the countries from which they emigrated.  Open U.S. borders would most likely draw people from both ends of the bell curve … the affluent and the impoverished of the world. Yes, Silicone Valley would get all the engineers it wants (at cheaper rates than today), but also the trade unions would be annulated by the availability of building-trade workers at well below today’s wage rates.

We see this already happening. Would these people be visible to the IRS and local governments?  Probably not.  Therefore, the only solution to the ability of governments to survive would be to impose a value-added (national sales) tax.  And of course, this would very likely be on top of existing taxes which would squeeze the middle class in this country to the point of near extinction.

Even the European Union is considering re-establishing internal border controls as a result of problems occurring there due to illegal immigrants … see: Notre-Europe Story. No, I am quite sure that open borders in the United States would be horrendously distorting and a disaster of monumental proportions. We need a lot more head and much less heart in this debate (and in our administration).

The Squeeze

When I was a newbie to the world of finance, as a programmer at the Bank of New York, I had a boss that said something that set me back on my heels.  He expressed the elitist feeling that paying higher taxes to keep the lower classes mollified was not such a bad thing.  I guess that this quid pro quo had never entered my mind at this point in my life ... but of late I have thought about it more and more.  Clearly limousine liberals reflect this notion to a fair-thee-well ... while at the same time hiring lawyers and tax accountants to minimize their actual tax burden.

And what is the result of this "let 'em eat cake" attitude?  To use Senator Elizabeth Warren's phrase (herself a plutocrat) "the middle class is getting hammered."  This is because they do not have the benefit of all the tax avoidance schemes of their betters ... or access to politicians to write new ones ... nor do they receive much of the largess directed to their poorer brethren. I have written before about the squeeze being put on the middle class ... please read: Middle-Classness and pay particular attention to the chart in the referenced Washington Post story.  If this growing divide is obvious to the statisticians, it must also be obvious to the politicians.

Anyone who can add two and two must also see that Obamacare is also constructed to put pressure on middle Americans.  Something like 80% of those signing up on the health care website are being placed in expanded Medicaid (read free or heavily-subsidized health insurance) while the upper classes are either now being exempted from this law by our fearless leader ... or already have no-sweat Cadillac coverage. The ones again getting squeezed are individuals in the middle class who, having lost their existing coverage, are now being forced to pay higher premiums, higher co-pays, higher deductibles  ... or all three.  This law's true intent is now becoming evident -- income redistribution.

Let me unwind the political logic here.  If those sucking on government teats will vote Democrat ... and those well-off liberals, who share my former Bank of New York boss's attitude, will vote Democrat ... and the middle class is disappearing ... who is left to vote Republican?  All the juice will be out of the orange.

Middle Classness

The middle class in the United States is on the decline.  Although this has been a long-term trend, recent years have acerbated the disparity between the upper and middle classes … while the lower classes seem to be doing OK … see the Growing Income Divide graph in the following story: Washington Post Story.  As can be seen in this graph, the lower classes are holding their own … most likely due to the recent dramatic growth in our welfare state ... while the middle classes are being eroded ... and the upper classes are on a roll.

Why is this middle-class shrinkage happening?  I believe that our reliance upon the Federal Reserve Bank to spur our (however anemic) national economic growth with artificially low interest rates is one reason.  This means that those plutocrats with plenty of assets can benefit from the difference between their low borrowing costs and what they can achieve with arbitrage in the various asset markets (stocks, bonds, communities, and currencies).  Whereas, our less sophisticated middle class, including many retirees, are stuck behind the eight-ball of low returns on their more modest assets.

Also the continued decline in the U.S. manufacturing sector is another drag on middle-class prosperity … exacerbated by increased government regulation and many unions hitting the glass ceilings on their wage inflations.  There also has been a dramatic swing to part-time labor in the service sector (due to that you-know-what law).

In closing, I cannot ignore the connection to the “Black Value System” that members of the Trinity United Church (whose membership included the Obama’s prior to 2008) signed as part of their church commitment.  One of the tenants of this pledge was “Disavowal of the Pursuit of Middleclassness” … see reference in: Liberal Progressive. Have President Obama’s policy implementations over the last five years somehow been swayed by his previous Trinity United Church signed pledge?  I wonder?

Afterthought: The middle class is one of the pillars of a capitalistic society.  Its current erosion here can do nothing but accelerate the United States's movement toward European-style stateism. Perhaps that is part of the strategy?

The Very Gray Lady

The New York Times is again trying to sell the Boston Globe newspaper after disposing of many of its other communications properties.  This is a sign of the dowager phase of what was once a great paper.  Now it has sunk to being mostly a stenographer for the Democrat party.  A perfectly repugnant example of same is its Republican slam-piece in last Sunday’s magazine section, see: Can the Republicans be Saved from Obsolescence  A liberal friend (like many of them these days) sent me the following editorial from the New York Times which typifies this paper’s declining standards (see: Why Taxes Have to Go Up) ... in order to set me straight.  Surprise, surprise … it once again proselytizes for higher taxes on the wealthy … I suspect to help dig Obama out of the predicament he has gotten himself into by having previously signed the government spending sequestration bill due to kick in on March 1^st.. This (not-too-well-written) editorial’s  tag line is:

Raising taxes at the top is neither punitive nor gratuitous. It is a needed step, both to achieve near-term budget goals and to lay the foundation for a healthy budget in the future. As the economy strengthens and the population ages, more taxes will be needed from further down the income scale, both to meet foreseeable commitments, especially health care, as well as unforeseeable developments, from wars to technological challenges. But there will never be a consensus for more taxes from the middle class without imposing higher taxes on wealthy Americans, who have enjoyed low taxes for a long time.

Now the fiscal cliff deal which was just passed in January and signed into law by Obama, raises the tax rate on “millionaires and billionaires” (those single earners making over $400K per year) to almost 40%.  Tasting blood, Our Dear Leader wants to extract another hundredweight of flesh from these same taxpayers … and then (read the editorial again more carefully) move the taxing scythe into the middle class … all without cutting discretionary or entitlement spending.  According to Obama and the Times, all we have is a taxing problem, not a spending problem.  This is ideological Alzheimer's disease.

The rest of this editorial is mostly half-truths or outright mendacity … e.g.s, “On the spending side, Republicans are resisting cuts to defense.” (Are not the Republicans willing to permit the looming budget sequestration which includes draconian defense spending cuts … on top of the already-existing D.O.D. one-half a trillion dollar cuts over the next decade … see: Huffington Post Story?) And another, “[Republican spending reductions] implies brutalizing cuts in nondefense discretionary areas, like education and environment, which are already set to fall to their lowest level as a share of the economy since the 1950s.”  As anyone with a frontal lobe can see, this is pure fiction.  The environment and education were hardly on the federal government’s radar screen in the 1950s.  And you can find other truth bendings in this editorial without any eyestrain if you care to look.

So, what was once the news standard of this nation’s intellectual elitists is now a crone feeding sardines to all the neighborhood cats  and serving tea and scones to anyone who’ll grace her door and listen to her relate her past glories.