Can We Trust the New Republicans?

The New Republican House of Representatives was sworn in yesterday. Republican pundits made a big deal about how this represents a big change for the country and that the people have had enough of "big government." But will Republicans actually fulfill their campaign promises? Can we trust them to shrink the size of government like they say they will?

There is some reason for hope. Much of the support for this change came from the Tea Party, who agitated for less spending and lower taxes. Republicans used their support for the elections, and used the language of that political group. Politicians have a history of going back on their promises, and even going in the opposite direction, but this at least seems like a step in the right direction and maybe even a hopeful turn of events.

In reality, however, attacking waste and corruption in government spending will not be enough. Taken together, social security, medicare, and medicaid take up nearly 40% of the federal budget. If you do nothing about these programs then you will only make a small dent in the federal budget. Republicans have stayed far away from talking about these programs because they realize that they are sacred cows. But this is the only way to effect real change in spending levels. Sadly enough, it does not seem as though this political generation is up to the task.

Furthermore, there is the history of Republican spending under Bush.

See there between 2000 and 2007? I do not see a decrease in spending in that time period, even though Republicans had majorities in the federal government. If a Republican federal government could not do it, then how can a coalition government do it, and why should we trust them to do it?

One day it will happen, we will finally see decreases in federal spending, but I just do not foresee that day as being in the near future.

Schwarzenegger Goes Out With a Bang

More like a stab, that is. It was recently announced that in the waning hours of his term as governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger commuted the sentence of a man that plead guilty to voluntary manslaughter. The real issue that people have taken with this, though, is that this is the son of the former speaker of the California Assembly. Esteban Nuñez is the son of Fabian Nuñez.

And now that the deed is done, there is no recourse to correct this obvious injustice and corruption. Only impeachment could have reversed the decision, but now that Schwarzenegger is a former governor, this is not possible. The decision is done. As if Schwarzenegger's reputation was not tarnished enough by going back on all of his campaign promises and leaving California in worse shape than it was when he first came into office, he now has this on his hands. He became buddy-buddy with a politician and sold out his soul.

But I thought that this would be a good opportunity to discuss the concept of voluntary manslaughter as a crime. Murder is punishable by life in prison, as it should be. Involuntary manslaughter, which is defined as an accident, is also punishable. Isn't the reason that we put people into prison supposed to be because they pose a threat to the general public? Does a person who engages in involuntary manslaughter dangerous? If it is an accident, then we have to say no.

Esteban Nuñez, though, intended to kill. There is no reason for him to get an early release. There is no justice when such a disregard for justice, as Schwarzenegger showed, goes unpunished and has no legal recourse for retraction. A sad moment indeed.

Let's Stop Demonizing the Rich

Once upon a time in America, there were some popular sayings. "It's none of your business," is one that we seem to have lost, and we need it back badly. How many times in the past few years have we heard rumblings about windfall profits, corporate profits, executive salaries, etc. Why should this matter? When did profits become evil? When did becoming rich become evil? This pseudo-socialistic ideal is spreading far, but before we go tarring and feathering, let's remind ourselves of the purpose of wealth accumulation.

Capital and finance are oft forgotten parts of the economy. When a factory wants to buy a new machine, where does it get the capital to finance such a project? The factory will get a loan. And who imparts these loans? Well either directly or indirectly, that would be people who save money. And who saves (and invests) the most money? The rich of course.

With more production, we get a lower average price of goods, higher real salaries, and in general a greater standard of life. All of this is possible because of capital. Without the rich, there is no capital in a free market. Well, there would be some capital from the lower income earners, but the bulk of capital in our economy comes from the rich. Instead of demonizing the rich, we should be thanking them for furnishing the jobs that we have.

But couldn't the government invest just as easily? Why not just tax the rich, allow the government to invest, and then distribute the profits amongst the people? The fact is, we should never trust the government with such a responsibility. Not only would it be very liable to corruption, it simply would not work. The man who lends his money has in his best interest the greatest net return on that money. He never wants to lose money. The government, on the other hand, may not have that as its highest goal. Furthermore, it is slightly less concerned with earning a profit. The man who lends could lose everything if the investment does not succeed. What will happen to the government bureaucrat who does the same thing with that money? Probably not much, he has a secure salary. So then the rich who have an interest in keeping their money will be the best investors. The best investments help all of us.

So before we get mad about record profits and executive payouts, let's realize the function that the rich serve. Sure, get mad at profits that are unjustly earned (such as by sweetheart deals with the government), but the honest businessman that becomes rich by his work should be thanked. Without capital, we would still be peasants just barely avoiding starvation our entire lives. Thankfully we have developed and can live a relatively opulent lifestyle. Wealth accumulation has made life enjoyable and not just laborious.