On the occasion of the 103rd birthday of President Ronald Reagan, Hope n' Change just wanted to indulge in a little wish fulfillment by imagining what he would have to say to the pipsqueak currently resting his heels on the Gipper's desk.
It's hard to imagine that Reagan would be pleased with the CBO report that the hourly equivalent of over two million fulltime jobs will be lost because of Obamacare in the next few years, because it makes increasing economic sense for people to work less in order to qualify for larger subsidies.
The White House is actually celebrating this news, saying that Americans are embracing the "choice" to work less in order to enjoy more quality family time, compose more symphonies, and paint more Sistine Chapels.
They'll also be spending a lot of their free time in Russian-style waiting lines to actually see anyone remotely related to the medical field, although pencils and paper will be supplied in waiting rooms so that the sickly can write poetry and novels while the hours crawl by.
But we can (and will!) crack wise about Obamacare another day. For now, we just want to recognize the birthday of Ronald Reagan...and thank him for the many gifts he gave us during his years of service, and the inspiration he still provides today.
We miss you Uncle Ronnie!
ReplyDeleteI must say that I agree with Der Fuhrer. The millions of lost jobs will allow people more free time to spend with their families. They will now have all day to do quality things together such as sifting through dumpsters for that perfect family meal, as well as artistic endeavors such as drawing chalk sketches on the cardboard boxes they live in.
Whenever I see a picture or read the words of RR I burst into tears. The difference between RR and the lying, phony, narcissistic psychopath in the WH now is heartbreaking.
DeleteJust heard this morning that some of the nightmare o'care will not be implemented until after the 2016 elections. Are there no grownups in Congress who can see this man is destroying this country, and want to stop him? I know there was only one Ronald Reagan, but someone needs to TRY to step in his shoes for a while.
ReplyDeleteWhen comparing these two people (notice I didn't say "comparing these two men"), even the initials say something: RR (symbol for one of the best cars you can buy) and BO (symbol for... well, you know).
ReplyDeleteThe difference between O'Liar and Ron is like the difference between black and white. There! I said it!
Fuuny... one of my "prove you're ot a robot words" is coffee.
You forgot his real initials......BS
DeleteI continually mourn Ronald Reagan, clearly one of the greatest men, let alone presidents, who ever lived. And I can hear him telling the AHTUS precisely that. Perhaps even Mr. & Mrs. America, tear down this administration...
ReplyDeleteThey are hard at work "europeanizing" the US. The enurement of liberal arts majors who cannot find real employment is part and parcel of this. Can I sing? Yeah. Can I play musical instruments? Yeah. Can I draw and paint? Better than some. Can I write? Yeah. My family has always been fairly gifted in aesthetics. Did I choose one of these as my calling? No. Nor am I inclined to move to any of them any time soon.
I chose to "contribute" in a technical, real mode rather than to the applause of those who would be my masters. You see, music, art, writing are all dependent on the acceptance of and by the intended audience. Nothing real is produced. You cannot eat a painting, or a piece of music, or a well-wrought tale. You depend on others assigning a value to what is produced - precisely what a controlling government wants. When you actually make something real; something necessary for fulfilling the lowest three tiers of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, they have much less control over you - your product is in demand, and your product's value is not predicated on that "popular opinion" so easily manipulated by the organs of government. And that's why they both regulate the living hell out of producers, to the goal that no-one produces for anyone but the government, and why they promote liberal studies over practical studies. It worked so well for Europe, too...
Thanks for the cartoon, Stilt. It really hit home.
What @Judi King said! O'Blamer is a lying, phony, narcissistic psychopath. Perfect analogy of that Rag Head Wannabe. And thank you Stilton for bringing a smile to my face today. I miss Ronaldus Magnamus greatly. The 80s where such fun and it wasn't just the music.
ReplyDeleteI don't think most Americans that lived through that age will ever completely grasp the degree that Reagan saved this nation. (at least for another 30 years anyway) Very few of the current generation will even understand it.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the benefits of Reagan's willingness to stand up to communism (contrary to prevalent liberal "coexist" mentality of the time) is obvious, IMHO it was his stance for restraining government that was most significant.
Most significantly, if Reagan had not stood up to the illegally striking air traffic controllers in 1981, America today would be a very different place. Reagan understood what was at risk, and took a seemingly bold zero-tolerance position with the union. And when they did go on strike, Reagan did not hesitate to fire them. He knew that the minor inconvenience imposed upon the country for a few weeks was absolutely nothing compared to what we'd have to endure if every public sector union thought they could get away with it at will. (A look at what Margaret Thatcher was dealing with in Britain was scary enough)
Had Reagan blinked and the controllers union gotten its way, the floodgates would have opened and by the '90s we would have been like most of Europe, suffering debilitating public worker strikes on a near-daily basis every time another union decided that they wanted a bigger raise or more benefits.
Just imagine the "sequester silliness" happening every single week, except it wouldn't just be the national parks getting shut down and park rangers going out of their way to find creative ways to inconvenience you.
And you are right, @Stiltion, that Reagan definitely would not be pleased with the current state of affairs. It's becoming everything he warned us about between the '50s and the end of is career; from the unsustainable debts to the malaise he inherited from the Carter years. Frankly, Reagan couldn't not even conceive of an idea as absurd as ObamaCare, or if he could, it would only be as I see it; a Trojan horse designed specifically to destroy everything that was great about his America, and everything he held dear.
My prayer for America is that another Ronald Reagan arise from the smoldering wreckage of today's cynical and corrupt GOP. Or perhaps there's a Ronald Reagan waiting to lead the Tea Party, who's ideology the real Reagan would have been completely in sync with.
This just in: Another miserable jobs report. Seems that the media and stock market are collectively shrugging, as it's not a surprise to anyone.
@Emmentaler Limburger, it's almost as though they actually want a "hunger games" kind of world, where "educated", "cultured" and "enlightened" people such as themselves would inhabit charmed metropolises while the grungy "tech fold" such as yourself be relegated to the hinterlands to do whatever it is that you do, which they don't really understand. Washington DC and it's suburbs (most of the richest per-capital communities in the nation with the lowest unemployment rates are now there) gets more like this every day.
ReplyDeleteThe only problem with this plan is when the "tech folk" no longer see the point of getting up in the morning.
It's not just the 2.3 million lost (or misplaced, or re-arranged, or 'work-less-by-choice) jobs. The CBO report also projected that 7 million people will lose their employer-provided health insurance because of obamacare.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention the spreading malaise and dependency on the government - and by extension, the productive members of society - by those who, according to the dems, will gleefully work less and expect others to pay for their health insurance.
I need more 'coffee'...
@John: perfect analogy - and the "peacekeepers" are already gearing up through the militarization of police departments across the nation.
ReplyDeleteScary how reality seems hell-bent on imitating art. Remember: at one time, Joules Vern's "From Earth To The Moon" was rank science fiction...
@Geoff King- These days, I'm nostalgic for the street people who wrote signs saying "Will Work For Food," rather than the current mindset which is "Why Work For Food?"
ReplyDelete@Jane K- Right you are; as bad as Obamacare is now, it's going to get a lot worse as additional parts are implemented.
And if no one in Washington can fill Reagan's shoes these days, I wish they'd at least try to follow the path he blazed for them.
@Judi King- I just tried to imagine Reagan pulling the stunts and weasel-worded evasions that are second nature to Obama...and I couldn't do it. When you compare the two, you are comparing a leader to a mere politician. Comparing a man to a boy.
@Colby- Without coffee (of either kind) I can't prove I'm human either.
@Emmentaler- I absolutely celebrate the arts, but have a very realistic view about what they're worth when the feces hits the fan.
I'll also point out that leisure time has nothing to do with inspiring artists. Genuine artists will find the time or make the time to create because they must. Those less driven are essentially hobbyists, and there's nothing wrong with that - except when the government wants taxpayers to subsidize those hobbies.
@Sparky- Even my daughter, who was born in the late 80's, has nostalgia for that decade. Hair and fashions were goofy, but it sure seemed like our nation and culture were in better shape.
@John the Econ- I can't fathom president Soetoro ever having the courage that Reagan showed in firing the air traffic control strikers. And you're so right that if Reagan had backed down, we'd be having public sector strikes as a way of life.
I, too, hope for someone of Reagan's courage and strength to appear on the national scene. But it had better be soon.
@CenTexTim- From what I've read, 7 million people losing employer insurance is a low estimate.
And sadly, this is exactly what the Left wants...to destroy the system, say "well, we tried," and then insist that single-payer is the only remaining option.
@Emmentaler- Today's WSJ had a pretty good article about the militarization of some police departments. Spooky stuff.
Econ John,
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean, "miserable jobs report?" The unemployment rate went DOWN again! Geez, don't you watch to the news? It's another miracle bestowed upon the working class by the World's Best Job Creator in the World.
Seriously, whoever came up with the gubmint's method to calculate unemployment should be slowly flogged to death with cooked cauliflower. The real number is closer to 25%; professional and skilled jobs are rapidly giving way to sevice jobs. Does Barry really think EVERYONE can work entry level? Like, I'll work at McDonald's, and all of our customers either work at McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's.... Sounds like a thriving economic model to me!
Oh wait... I forgot! HALF of the people will sit at home writing songs and poetry, or painting beautiful pictures like crosses immersed in urine, not working at McDonald's! My bad.
@Colby, by the end of his term, Obama will have completed the "fundamental transformation" from "Morning for America" to "Mourning for America".
ReplyDeleteCompletely unrelated topic: I really, really hope this is for real; Sandra Fluke may be running for Congress to replace the retiring moron from California, Henry Waxman. Is that too much to hope for or not?
There's absolutely no way that anything other than a Democrat is going to win Waxman's district, so it might as well be a complete idiot like Fluke.
For those who don't remember, she's the middle-aged co-ed who went before Congress to complain that she couldn't afford her birth control, and figured it was our responsibility to pay for it. Rush Limbaugh took some heat for calling her a "slut", which was odd, because liberals have been calling almost all conservative women sluts for years and nobody seemed to have a problem with that. It was also befuddling because as an unmarried middle-aged seemingly life-long co-ed who felt comfortable enough to go before everyone proclaiming her need for us to finance her recreational sex, it might have actually been accurate to call her a "slut", unlike the insults that liberals had been tossing about. Barely a generation ago, it was inconceivable that anyone would even think of standing up in public and demanding "the public option" for their recreational sex, married or not. And had they actually done so, the vast majority of society would have felt free to call that person a "slut". Time change, I suppose.
Either way, a Congressman Fluke would be an entertaining addition to the cast of ignorant Democrat idiots focused on stupid issues.
Speaking of, how about converting the failing Post Office into a bank? That's the idea of Taxagawea, aka Elizabeth Warren. At first I thought that April Fools had come early, but she actually wants to convert the Postal Service into a "bank" to help serve the "under-banked".
http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-wants-to-turn-post-offices-into-banks-2014-2
Yes, the look on your face is similar to the one I had when I read that.
My post office can't even do simple things like keeping stamps and Priority Mail packaging in stock. The people working there don't seem to care. I mean, when you're running low on stamps, how hard is it to order more? I can't imagine letting these people handle my money, and can't understand why any sentient being would want them to. My guess is that since the government wants to do away with paper checks in lieu of direct deposit, the real agenda is that it will just end up being a convenient place to get cash from your welfare payment.
Again, was such an idea even conceivable during Reagan's era?
Yeahman.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you'll remember this one from last Nov.
John the Econ: Re: you oost about Postal Banks jostled one of my nearly defunct brain cells.
ReplyDeleteBack in the day when the Post Office was still a cabinet level Dept. They did have a "Postal Savings" system.
See here: http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/postal-savings-system.pdf
That said, I can't diagree with your critcism of the current system.
My father put in 38 years with the Post Office DEPT, mostly in what was known as the Railway Mail Service. He retired about the time it became the Postal (non)Service.
Now that I've have more time to mull it over, I think I've figured out the real agenda: Since the government wants to do away with mailing paper checks (the delivery of those being the last big mission of the postal service after junk mail) in lieu of direct deposit, and the only place to get cash out of a welfare payment otherwise is those rip-off check cashing joints, the idea is that the post office will just end up being a convenient place for welfare recipients to get cash from their Social Security and welfare payments.
ReplyDeleteThat's right. Liz Warren is going to turn the post office into another welfare office.
Top of the class, Stilt! Reagan was one of the last of the American 'men'!
ReplyDeleteI am all for Romney giving it another try...I mean, who else we got that is actually electable? Just tell him to focus a little harder , smile less and be FEARLESS!! Really...who else is ready with his qualifications?
God bless Ronnie, kinda reminds me of watching 20 mule team botox that pelosi uses.
ReplyDeleteHelp me out here John the econ,didnt we already try lizzy borden opps I mean warren's post office idea on a smaller scale? Think it was called the house banking and post office scandal?
ReplyDeleteYes, @REM1875. The government's track record with managing fiances is pretty dismal. Pretty much the only thing they are good at is dispensing other people's money for their own interests.
ReplyDeleteAnd I haven't even talked yet about the "MyRA" the President proposed this week. To be honest, I don't fully understand what it's supposed to be, and I'm not sure he knows either. Supposedly it's a new kind of IRA that would exclusively invest in government bonds. Considering that the 10-year was returning something less than 2.7% this week, it's hardly the long-term vehicle I'd choose for funding my retirement, especially if I wanted more useful money when I retired than I have now.
The more cynical side of my brain (which usually proves more accurate in the long run) says that this is just another scheme to tax the poor and stupid in order to fund government largesse.
When you invest in a traditional or a Roth IRA, the government doesn't get much out of it. In fact, they see that as losing money since they're actually cutting you a tax break in order to encourage you to save. With the MyRA, the government would get the money directly, which they immediately "invest" on more vacations and cowboy poetry festivals.
If they can sucker enough people into investing in government spending at ridiculously low interest rates, they won't have to borrow as much from China, and they get a new sources of cheap money, which they are going to desperately need now that the Fed appears committed to "tapering" QE. Effectively, they get to extend the Ponzi scheme out perhaps another half-generation or so.
The problem with the expansion of our government is that there simply isn't enough "rich" people to pay for it all, no matter what the "income inequality" people say. The reality is that they have to zap the middle and low classes to pay for it all. And since they've so wrecked the economy and income tax system to where the middle class is now paying less taxes (due to lower employment and earnings) and the lower classes not only pay nothing, but actually get money spit back at them, they need new mechanisms to extract wealth from everyone. The MyRA clearly achieves this.
As I've been saying for some time, the very people the Progressives say they they are there to help are the ones who are going to get raped the worst.
@Colby- On the bright side, if Barry wants everyone to have burger-flipping jobs (if they have any jobs at all), it's unlikely that Michelle will be able to outlaw fast food anytime soon.
ReplyDelete@John the Econ- I'm all for Sandra Fluke being as visible as possible, just to keep the conservative base energized by her smug idiocy.
And Elizabeth "Princess Running Gag" Warren's idea about giving banking services to the post office is a jaw dropper. When I visit the post office, I feel like the folks behind the counter are doing a repertory performance of "The Walking Dead."
@DougM- D'oh!! I don't remember having seen your cartoon, so any theft was accidental. Or, uh, a tribute! Yeah, that's the ticket! (And this is a good time for me to remind readers to see DougM's stuff over at Sondrakistan.com!)
@It's No Gouda- Interesting to read about the old postal saving system. But I just can't see it working today (to put it mildly).
@John the Econ- Bingo! I think you're absolutely right about the real agenda. Brilliant analysis!
@Judi King- It's funny, but I never really thought of the "BS" initials for Barry Soetoro. How appropriate!
@PRY- Romney wasn't initially my guy, but I would have sawed an arm off if it would have gotten him elected over Barry. I think he would have been a good President (a magnificent one compared to B. Hussein). That being said, I think he now has the stink of "loser" on him (unfairly so), and moreover has lost interest in this corrupt competition.
@REM1875- I'm old enough to remember Ronnie pitching Borax on TV (and we used it in our home). And "20 Mule Team Botox?" That's funny!
@Rem1875- I'm pretty sure that most government financial programs can accurately be categorized as scandals.
@John the Econ- The "MyRA" is like something cooked up in the lab of a mad and not-too-bright scientist. Obama has no legal authority whatsoever to create such a savings instrument - and even if he did, it would still stink on ice.
As you point out, the money put into a MyRA account would go straight to the Treasury for immediate spending on whatever damn fool thing the government wants (I just read that the taxpayers forked out $90 million for Barry to go to Mandela's funeral, none of which apparently went toward getting a sign language interpreter).
Supposedly the individual's money will be safe, and will be returned with (rotten) interest. But it won't be secured with anything other than the president's promise; the same president who promised we could all keep our health insurance - until we couldn't.
Stilton,
ReplyDeleteHey, GMTA.
I was just tryin' to do a locker-room pat on the butt for your timely version.
And a "Me too!"
And leeching.
Yeah, mostly leeching.