Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Benevolent Dictator Gives to the Poor

Poor New York families received an early Christmas present Tuesday: $200 per kid for school-related expenses. As one grateful peasant exclaimed: "Thank God for Obama. He's looking out for us." This episode shares much in common with the infamous rice-cooker giveaway from Fidel Castro a while back. Benevolent dictators just love giving people "free" stuff to win a bigger place in the hearts and minds of their huddled masses.

But, you say, Obama is no dictator (yet); he's just the president. Quite right. So are the joyful serfs thanking the right person? Who really bought all these needy kids new shiny lunchboxes (or whatever else the parents decided to spend the money on--there were no restrictions)? Exactly 20% of the credit goes to the most merciful George Soros who ponied up $35 million. I suppose that's almost as good as getting the money from Obama himself. And who was so generous as to provide the remaining $140 million? You were.

The rest of the money came from the great magical stimulus bill (not sure whether it's from Porkulus 1 or 2). Free money for all! Real economic stimulus for none. That Obama is some financial wizard . . . I can't wait until we get "free" health care, too! Obama has a pretty sweet setup: You pay the bills and he gets all the credit. At least Castro used his own (stolen) money to buy trinkets for his clamoring people. Obama just uses ours to do it. Don't expect any thank-you notes anytime soon.

But at least the economy was stimulated, right? Wrong. Nothing new was produced. No value was added. What do you bet those nifty 10-notebooks-for-a-dollar sales are suddenly over? This was a simple transfer of wealth from U.S. taxpayers scattered all over the country to "deserving" and "entitled", albeit grateful (to Obama), New York residents and to local New York businesses. There will be more dictator-like shell games in our future if we don't take a stand and oppose this nonsense. Let the "uncivil" shouting continue!


Travis said...

"Porkulus" - I love it! But that wasn't the best comment of the post. This was: "But at least the economy was stimulated, right? Wrong. Nothing new was produced. No value was added."

Nothing is being stimulated - just transfered.

Philip said...

The old story about the broken window stimulating economic activity (now the window-maker and the window-installer have precious new work to do, etc.) is also not true.

The shopkeeper was planning to buy a new suit with his money--now he has to buy a window. Good for the window guy; bad for the tailor (not to mention the shopkeeper--who also has a drop in business and productivity during the unfortunate episode).

Breaking stuff (for example, perfectly good used cars) will NEVER leave you with a net economic gain. At best it is a transfer; at worst it causes a loss of productivity.