I'm getting pretty tired of hearing politicians talking about jobs, jobs, jobs. Every single one that does it almost instantly loses credibility with me (depending, of course, on the context of the comment).
Elliott! What a mean, horrible thing to say! You live such a sheltered life! You've always had three meals to eat. You (or your primary caretaker, in your youth) have never been without work for an extensive period. You're spoiled! There are starving people out there with no jobs and who haven't had jobs in a long time!
Knowledge does indeed sound cruel to ignorant ears, doesn't it?
Here's the skinny on jobs: jobs are a symptom. That's right, a symptom. It's a sign, or indication, of something else, typically greater and lying under the surface.
Take for an analogy the male Homo sapiens' muscular figure. The jobs are like the apparent size of his muscles. His job is to attract ladies' attention, right? Right. Well, the best way to do that (analogously) is for him give the appearance of having bigger muscles. There are two ways he can do this: he can squeeze his bicep up when he flexes, push and stretch his fat out when he shows his abs, etc, etc, etc, or he can actually increase the size of his muscles and decrease fat levels through weight training.
There are two questions here: the question of jobs and the questions of economic health. Jobs are a symptom of economic health. Focusing on jobs, worrying about jobs, is like a man manually manipulating his muscles while posing in front of a mirror. You've got a basic idea right, but you're going nowhere fast. Focusing on jobs is a guarantor of failure for both jobs and economic health. Focus on economic health and you'll get them both.
As the government attempts to crank out "shovel-ready" jobs (some of them "not as shovel-ready as we thought" ironically), what they're doing is taking money from the private sector, spending much of it in wasteful and frivolous ways that benefit economic health not at all, then putting a portion of it back into the private sector--and this remaining portion's effect is negligible to virtually nonexistent. If this scheme sounds like a good idea to you, the next time your blanket is too short to keep your feet warm, cut some off the top and sew it onto the bottom. While you're warming your feet doing that, I'll tell you that such a plan seems more to me like the government prodding up weak muscles and stretching out chunks of fat, saying, "Look at me, chicka! I'm so hot!"
Hit the weight room. Take measures to free up America's economy by freeing up America's individuals, especially the individuals who have the greatest control over America's economy. If you do this, you'll get the jobs, and much more. If you don't, you won't even get the jobs.
Most socialistic material-comfort-oriented European countries would jump at the chance to have six or seven percent unemployment. Remember when we had five or four not too long ago? I'd hold on to that memory if I were you. At the rate things are going, it might be just a memory for quite a while longer.
That leaves us to ask the question: what of these politicians that parrot jobs constantly? Well, they're either stupid or dangerous. (I'm not really sure I can hold ignorance as an excuse. Once they've reached their level, I feel like I can hope for a basic grasp of economics and consequences from them without being too expectant.) They're insulting our intelligence, showing us that they think of us as immature, reactionary, emotional (remember I hate those things), populist children. They're also reflecting poorly on their own intelligence at the same dang time.
The real core if the issue, though, is this: America was founded on principles of freedom! Nowhere is "jobs" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution in the way it is used today. (Don't even try the "General Welfare" clause; if the Founding Fathers had known that those two words would be more abused than the entire world's supply of cannabis in the 1960s, I'm sure they would have happily left it out entirely. Examining the historical context and state of mind of the authors of the Constitution at the time of its writing will reveal that to them, "General Welfare" had nothing to do with jobs.) The economic health and jobs came as positive side-effects of the unique environment of unprecedented individual liberty, both political and economic. If jobs and an end-of-the-nose outlook on material prosperity become the fundamental core of American governing philosophy, we might as well use the Constitution for toilet paper. That will change America radically. In such a society, a totalitarian sense of fairness and job-worship reigns. Be careful what you wish for--it might come true.
I could have gone longer and more in-depth on this issue, but it's late, I have to get up early, and my hair hurts. If there are specific points to this (or to anything else in existence) that you'd like me to address in another post, please comment below.
Elliott! What a mean, horrible thing to say! You live such a sheltered life! You've always had three meals to eat. You (or your primary caretaker, in your youth) have never been without work for an extensive period. You're spoiled! There are starving people out there with no jobs and who haven't had jobs in a long time!
Knowledge does indeed sound cruel to ignorant ears, doesn't it?
Here's the skinny on jobs: jobs are a symptom. That's right, a symptom. It's a sign, or indication, of something else, typically greater and lying under the surface.
Take for an analogy the male Homo sapiens' muscular figure. The jobs are like the apparent size of his muscles. His job is to attract ladies' attention, right? Right. Well, the best way to do that (analogously) is for him give the appearance of having bigger muscles. There are two ways he can do this: he can squeeze his bicep up when he flexes, push and stretch his fat out when he shows his abs, etc, etc, etc, or he can actually increase the size of his muscles and decrease fat levels through weight training.
There are two questions here: the question of jobs and the questions of economic health. Jobs are a symptom of economic health. Focusing on jobs, worrying about jobs, is like a man manually manipulating his muscles while posing in front of a mirror. You've got a basic idea right, but you're going nowhere fast. Focusing on jobs is a guarantor of failure for both jobs and economic health. Focus on economic health and you'll get them both.
As the government attempts to crank out "shovel-ready" jobs (some of them "not as shovel-ready as we thought" ironically), what they're doing is taking money from the private sector, spending much of it in wasteful and frivolous ways that benefit economic health not at all, then putting a portion of it back into the private sector--and this remaining portion's effect is negligible to virtually nonexistent. If this scheme sounds like a good idea to you, the next time your blanket is too short to keep your feet warm, cut some off the top and sew it onto the bottom. While you're warming your feet doing that, I'll tell you that such a plan seems more to me like the government prodding up weak muscles and stretching out chunks of fat, saying, "Look at me, chicka! I'm so hot!"
Hit the weight room. Take measures to free up America's economy by freeing up America's individuals, especially the individuals who have the greatest control over America's economy. If you do this, you'll get the jobs, and much more. If you don't, you won't even get the jobs.
Most socialistic material-comfort-oriented European countries would jump at the chance to have six or seven percent unemployment. Remember when we had five or four not too long ago? I'd hold on to that memory if I were you. At the rate things are going, it might be just a memory for quite a while longer.
That leaves us to ask the question: what of these politicians that parrot jobs constantly? Well, they're either stupid or dangerous. (I'm not really sure I can hold ignorance as an excuse. Once they've reached their level, I feel like I can hope for a basic grasp of economics and consequences from them without being too expectant.) They're insulting our intelligence, showing us that they think of us as immature, reactionary, emotional (remember I hate those things), populist children. They're also reflecting poorly on their own intelligence at the same dang time.
The real core if the issue, though, is this: America was founded on principles of freedom! Nowhere is "jobs" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution in the way it is used today. (Don't even try the "General Welfare" clause; if the Founding Fathers had known that those two words would be more abused than the entire world's supply of cannabis in the 1960s, I'm sure they would have happily left it out entirely. Examining the historical context and state of mind of the authors of the Constitution at the time of its writing will reveal that to them, "General Welfare" had nothing to do with jobs.) The economic health and jobs came as positive side-effects of the unique environment of unprecedented individual liberty, both political and economic. If jobs and an end-of-the-nose outlook on material prosperity become the fundamental core of American governing philosophy, we might as well use the Constitution for toilet paper. That will change America radically. In such a society, a totalitarian sense of fairness and job-worship reigns. Be careful what you wish for--it might come true.
I could have gone longer and more in-depth on this issue, but it's late, I have to get up early, and my hair hurts. If there are specific points to this (or to anything else in existence) that you'd like me to address in another post, please comment below.
No comments:
Post a Comment