Views on the News

Views on the News*

July 11, 2015


Obama is delusional as evidenced by his telling a group from the Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative that he is proudest of three accomplishments: 1) the economic recovery, 2) ObamaCare, and 3) his foreign policy.  When his narcissism and egotism spills over into the President’s warped perception of reality and the reality of the world depends on his clarity, then he has endangered the world.  Boasting about accomplishments that he has not achieved is mild psychosis with possible deleterious results.  Taking credit for three disasters is a failure to perceive the results of his actions.  We can’t blame Obama for being delusory.  His sycophants gave him a Nobel Prize before he did anything.  He was elected President even though he was lacking in experience and accomplishment.  He talks about having reversed the economic downturn when we have millions of people who are out of work or have quit looking for work.  Obama considers his failed economy a part of his legacy.  He eliminates jobs, spreads around side dishes of his own racism, and diminishes his black brothers’ economic power.  He has expanded our national debt to an impossible eighteen trillion dollars.  Imagine his bragging about ObamaCare, when he and Gruber openly admitted that they lied about not losing our doctors and health plans.  The creation of a new system does not mean that it is workable.  Having emasculated the greatest American military in the world, Obama brags about his effete foreign policy.  His bragging is embarrassing when you look at his failures in Russia, Ukraine, and China.  He pretends that he ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by sticking his ostrich head in a hole and making speeches out of a sandy megaphone.  ISIS is the result of his ostrich politics.  When terrorism is at a peak, he announces that he has contained it and that he decimated al-Qaeda.  In a moment of insane revisionism, he says that because of him “the United States is the most respected country on Earth.”  Other really powerful leaders thumb their noses at him and laugh.  Obama rails against income inequality while he encourages the divide between the rich and the poor.  He accentuates the divide between the left and the right by his hyper-partisan teleprompter rhetoric.  He is pushing for a counterproductive nuclear deal with Iran in order to announce that he is a peacemaker.  The opportunities for Iran’s double-crossing us are rife, and if this deal goes through, he will be celebrating himself while the destruction of the world is at hand.  He likes the glamour of a nuclear agreement, but he doesn’t understand or care about the results.  Obama wants to be remembered fondly, but as his record matures, he will be remembered as the electoral folly of utopian Democrat voters.

(“Obama the triple-loser” by David Lawrence dated July 10, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/07/obama_the_tripleloser.html )

Today’s “progressive” ideas are nothing but retreads of the notorious 19th and 20th century command-and-control tyrannies that killed about 120 million of their own citizens.  Variously known as socialism, Communism, and Marxism, their chief practitioners were Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot.  As long as we allow reality-denying liberals to call themselves “progressives” we are telling the world their tired, failed ideas are the smartest, most forward-thinking of mindsets.  Words define ideas; he who controls the language controls the argument.  We need Scott Walker or Ted Cruz or Ben Carson or Jeb Bush, actually all of the Republican contenders, to loudly expose “progressives” as cheerleaders for the most destructive ideas of all time.  You’d think that the disastrous history of what really happens when governments put their citizens in ideological chains would be enough to turn voters against the modern day incarnation of “progressivism.”  These victims of historical amnesia embrace Barack Obama’s diktat that government is their bff, entitled to regulate our lives because they are so benevolently concerned about our welfare.  So smart they can control nature by turning back the “warming” of the planet and the rise of the seas; all we have to do is give up our modern conveniences like electricity and gasoline.  Similarly, Mao Zedong insisted he could control China’s agricultural output via collectives, and forced labor; all his people had to do was starve to death.  Modern-day “progressives bred in the old mold have given us control-freak government that tells us what kind of healthcare we must have (the kind that triples our premiums and deductibles while denying us our preferred doctors and hospitals); what kind of gas we must use (ethanol, causing corn product prices to go sky-high and escalating world-wide hunger); what kind of light bulbs we must buy (bulbs eliminating American jobs now made in China, plus stuffed with lots of toxic mercury); what kind of food we should eat (banning sugar and trans fats; what kind of car we must drive (whatever green vehicle the government will pay us to buy), and so on.  Progressive thinking” derived from the old killer empires includes these wildly preposterous notions:

·    Capitalism and free enterprise, which have lifted more people out of poverty than any other system in the world, is actually evil and oppressive

·    Differences in class, wealth and race put humanity eternally at each others’ throats

·    Humans are responsible for global warming because of our selfish use of planet-killing carbon-based energy, even though carbon dioxide is only a miniscule .038 % of greenhouse gases according to the U.S. Geological Survey

·    Gas-powered cars are bad; electric cars good because they run on the fuel that lives in the walls of Millennials’’ garages (nothing to do with coal or other carbon energy)

·    Giving millions of illegals green cards won’t steal jobs from citizens who work in landscaping, construction, maintenance, restaurants and hotels because these are jobs “Americans won’t do”

·    The government is more responsible for your success than you are: “You didn’t build that!”

·    ISIS is not in fact Islamic and is certainly not the Islamic State it proclaims to be, even as it conquers vast swathes of the Middle East and murders tens of thousands

If irrationality were progressive, we would all be progressives.  It is easy for the Republican presidential candidates to dismantle this ridiculousness.  Call the “progressives” who they are really are: the retro belligerents of a ruinous and obsolete ideology that aims to enslave the personal liberties uniquely enshrined in America’s Constitution.

(“Stop Calling Them Progressives” by Joy Overbeck dated July 9, 2015 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/joyoverbeck/2015/07/09/stop-calling-them-progressives-n2022943 )


Obama still talks of his “change” legacy, as if altering something necessarily meant improving it.  Pulling all U.S. peacekeepers out of Iraq certainly changed the dynamics there, as ISIS can testify. The current talks with Iran will change Iranian ideas about how best to get the bomb.  Normalizing relations with Stalinist Cuba also changes, as in increases, that regime’s viability.  Jimmy Carter was asked to evaluate President Obama’s foreign-policy record, and he concluded that it was hard to identify any improvement in our relations with any nation since Obama took office, defining change as change for the worse.  Iran so far has repaid Obama’s indulgence by blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier in military drills, de facto running affairs in three other Middle Eastern states (Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen) and brazenly renouncing almost all the basic elements of prior nonproliferation understandings, from on-site inspections to cessation of enrichment to kickback sanctions in the event of noncompliance.  Expect the geriatric Castros to share the same contempt for American outreach, and to double down on their anti-Americanism and their ruthless suppression of freedom to add spite to the embarrassment of U.S. appeasement.  What allies we have left in the Middle East seem either tired of the U.S. change or baffled by it, especially Israel, Jordan, the Gulf monarchies, and Egypt.  Not since Israel got the bomb has any other ally or friend of the United States gone nuclear.  Obama may well change that trend too, as we see all sorts of former allies and friends. both in the Middle East and in the Pacific region, creeping toward becoming nuclear powers, fearing either that they are no longer protected by the U.S. or that, on Obama’s watch, too many crazy neighbors may go nuclear.  Our friends have come to resent American change, especially the Obama administration’s sense of self-righteousness that judges partners on impossible standards that it does not apply to enemies or neutrals, such as Iran, Hamas, and the Palestinian Authority.  If one wants an exemplar of change-failure, then look to Iraq or Libya.  The abrupt pullout of all U.S. peacekeepers changed postwar Iraq, just as, if we had left Kosovo in 2001 or South Korea in 1955, the result would have been utter chaos.  The Europeans are flummoxed.  In just six years, Obama’s defense cuts, his recessional from world leadership, and his abdication of a strong presence in the volatile Middle East, in other words, a changed foreign policy reminds our EU and NATO allies to be careful of the change you wish for.  Obama reminds us that European anti-Americanism was mostly a psychological tic, arising from dependency and a sense of inferiority, and always predicated on strong U.S. military and political leadership contextualizing European angst.  Obama, in truth, is not much interested in Europe, ancient or modern.  In the eyes of the Obama administration, Europe is to the rest of the world what the 1% at home is to the 99%, a “you didn’t build that” elite in need of some Obama redistribution of power.  Obama’s most notable change legacies at home are debt, indifference to the law, and racial polarization.  He is on schedule to have borrowed more money than all previous Presidents combined.  Debt can trump the gift of record U.S. oil production, which came about despite, not because of, Obama.  Obama has taught us that the government can slash defense spending, hike income taxes, and still end up with half-trillion-dollar annual deficits, in a way unthinkable under the old Gingrich–Clinton paradigm of budgetary compromise.  For the next two decades, American presidents will be paying down what Obama has squandered through jacking up social spending and not addressing entitlement and tax reform.  Obama does not much care for settled law. For him, enforcement of statutes hinges on the election cycle.  Little need be said about racial relations.  The president has editorialized on the nation’s racial fault-lines, both trivial and fundamental, from the Professor Gates psychodrama to Trayvon Martin and Ferguson, and usually gotten it quite wrong.  After nearly seven years, we know the Obama racial paradigm: Quite wealthy and privileged elites will lecture the members of the struggling middle class on their inherent “white privilege,” while the crises in the black community, high urban crime, escalating black-on-black murdering, epidemics of illegitimacy, drug use, and family disintegration, remain taboo subjects, given the need for record minority turnout and block voting at the polls.  Obama also has reminded us that big government” is by nature incompetent and scary, given that the larger and more politicized it becomes, the more it will be bored with its assigned tasks.  

(“The Failure of Change” by Victor Davis Hanson dated July 7, 2015 published by National Review Online at http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420802/failure-change )

Topping the list of major problems affecting black Americans is the breakdown in the black family, where only a third of black children are raised in two-parent households. Actually, the term "breakdown" is incorrect because families do not form in the first place.  Nationally, there is a black illegitimacy rate of 72%.  In some urban areas, the percentage is much greater.  Blacks constitute more than 50% of murder victims, where roughly 7,000 blacks are murdered each year, and 95% of the time, the perpetrator is another black.  If a black youngster does graduate from high school, it is highly likely that he can read, write and compute no better than a white seventh- or eighth-grader.  These are the major problems that face black Americans.  The strategy since the beginning of the civil rights movement held that black underrepresentation in the political arena was a major problem.  It was argued that the election of more black officials as congressmen, mayors and city council members would mean economic power, better neighborhoods and better schools.  Forty-three years ago, there were roughly 1,500 black elected officials nationwide.  According to the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, by 2011 there were roughly 10,500 black elected officials, including a black president.  Unfortunately by most any measure, the problems are worse.  There is the greatest black poverty, poorest education, highest crime and greatest family instability in cities such as: Detroit, St. Louis, Oakland, Calif., Memphis, Tenn., Birmingham, Ala., Atlanta, Baltimore, Cleveland, Philadelphia and Buffalo, N.Y.  The most common characteristic of these predominantly black cities is that, for decades, all of them have been run by Democrat and presumably liberal administrations.  What's more is that in most of these cities, blacks have been mayors, chiefs of police, school superintendents and principals and have dominated city councils.  Political power has not lived up to its billing.  So what should black politicians and activists now be focused on?

·    Banning the Confederate flag from public place? Because it is alleged to be a symbol of slavery? What would that do for black problems?

·    Digging up the bodies of Confederates and removing them from city parks? Why, when most of the black homicide victims were murdered by other blacks?

·    Banning the use of the "racist" term "thug" in reference to black criminals looting stores? How will politically correct wordsmanship improve public safety in high-crime areas?

·    Focus on white racists who are the interracial murderers.  FBI crime victimization surveys show that blacks commit 80% of all interracial violent crime.

The bottom line is that even if white people were to become angels tomorrow, it would do nothing for the problems plaguing a large segment of the black community.  Illegitimacy, family breakdown, crime and fraudulent education are devastating problems, but they are not civil rights problems. There is little or nothing that government or white people can do to solve these problems because the solution lies with black people.

(“Fiddling Away the Future of Black Americans” by Walter Williams dated July 7, 2015 published by Front Page Magazine at http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259373/fiddling-away-future-black-americans-walter-williams )


President Obama's new suburban integration plan will harm the middle class by reducing safety and property values.  It won't even provide the economic benefits it promises to relocated minorities.  We know this because HUD already tried a similar experiment under President Clinton of resettling urban poor in the suburbs, and it failed.  From 1994 to 2008, HUD moved thousands of mostly African-American families from government projects to higher-quality homes in safer and less racially segregated neighborhoods. The 15-year experiment, dubbed "Moving to Opportunity Initiative," or MTO, was based on the well-intentioned notion that relocating inner-city minorities to better neighborhoods would boost their employment and education prospects.  But adults for the most part did not get better jobs or get off welfare.  In fact, more went on food stamps, and their children did not do better in their new schools.  The 287-page study sponsored by HUD found that adults who relocated outside the inner city using Section 8 housing vouchers did not avail themselves of better job opportunities in their new neighborhoods, and saw a "sizable negative impact on annual earnings."  Unfortunately, crime simply followed them to their safer neighborhoods.  Even when reality mugs leftists, they never scrap their social theories; they just double down, so expect the same failed results, but on a national scale.

(“HUD’s Own Study Dashes Utopian Dream of Cross-Neighborhood Prosperity” dated July 9, 2015 published by Investor’s Business Daily at http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/070915-761014-hud-study-reveals-blacks-dont-benefit-economically-from-neighborhood-relocation.htm )

Despite the Supreme Court’s repeated attempts to prop it up, ObamaCare is collapsing.  We are once again hearing calls for single-payer health care, and most advocates of this system favor Medicare-for-All.  They want to put all Americans on the government program that covers the elderly and disabled.  It is a myth that Medicare coverage is consonant with cost effectiveness, high quality care, and satisfied patients.  It’s important to remember that retirees are not the only people covered by Medicare. About 18% of its 53 million beneficiaries get on the program via Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), and the worst obstacle these patients face is that hallmark of government health programs everywhere, a purgatorial waiting period.  A disabled patient must wait two years for Medicare coverage after qualifying for SSDI, and many wait far longer.  At any given point, “between 1.2 and 1.8 million disabled people are enduring the two-year waiting period.”  Considering the kinds of disabilities with which most of these patients suffer, it’s inevitable that some don’t survive the wait.  Surely, you would think seniors fare better than the disabled.  In fact, seniors endure countless hardships pursuant to the regulatory and reimbursement snarl in which they and their doctors find themselves immured by Medicare.  It is in the care of seniors that the bureaucrats most brazenly substitute their judgment for that of health care professionals.  The perversity with which Medicare applies these criteria beggars belief.  Not all of Medicare’s caprices result in death. Sometimes they merely ruin the patient financially.  The financial damage wrought by Medicare isn’t limited to patients. Medicare is also taking a huge and ever growing bite out of the federal budget.   The program is unsustainable if permitted to remain on its current fiscal trajectory.  In the 2014 Medicare Trustees report, the estimated shortfall was $28.5 trillion.  The government has imposed a series of “soviet style” price controls on the amount doctors can be paid by Medicare.  The most recent is the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), which will incentivize physicians to avoid the sickest patients, because the easiest way to have patients who score well on quality is to treat patients who are only moderately ill.  MIPS is just a warmed over component of Obamacare, and it is likely to be just as dysfunctional as every other facet of that Rube Goldberg contraption.  Medicare is by no means a paragon of government-run health care, much less a cure-all for the ills of our medical delivery system.  The best proposal has been to give Medicare’s beneficiaries control over how the money is spent.  Beneficiaries would receive their checks each month and then have complete discretion over how to spend it.  This proposal would do away with Medicare parts A and B and replace them with “a Basic Account and a Major Medical Account, whose accounts would be renewed every year.  The idea is that beneficiaries should chase health care the same way they buy other goods and services, in a free medical insurance marketplace.

(“Medicare’s Victims” by David Catron dated July 6, 2015 published by The American Spectator at http://spectator.org/articles/63353/medicare%E2%80%99s-victims )

Ever since the environmental movement began it has had a religious fervor: Like God, Earth is always capitalized, and there is an annual celebration, Earth Day, rather like holidays celebrated by other religions.  Of course, the dogmas of green religionists have changed over time: Prophecies of a new Ice Age gave way to forecasts of global warming, and those to a more all-purpose fear of climate change.  Pope Francis issued his encyclical, warning the world’s billion-plus Catholics that global warming, mainly created by man’s use of fossil fuels, is especially threatening to the poor.  The pontiff’s certitude aligns him squarely with President Obama, who proclaims the science of climate change to be settled, much as believers that the sun circled the Earth once claimed their science to be settled.  This merging of the Catholic and environmental faiths should come as no surprise. Pope and President, the respective leaders of the Catholic and environmental faiths, are as one in holding the “science” of global warming to be settled fact.  Obama’s followers also tend to believe he is infallible and cheered in 2008 when he proclaimed his victory in the Democrat primaries as “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” Both warn of biblical-scale droughts, floods, storms, and pestilence in our future, owing to the use of fossil fuels.  State-supported religions typically have state-supported schools. We have Common Core educational standards, not quite the same thing, but increasingly the impressionable young are taught that there is one truth, and it is that man’s activities are having a devastating effect on global climate.  The new K-12 science curriculum recommends “that by the end of Grade 5, students should appreciate that rising…. temperatures” will affect the lives of everyone.  By Grade 8, they “should understand that the release of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels is a major factor in global warming.”  By Grade 12, that “global climate models are very effective in modeling” and managing the impact of climate change.  Like all religions, environmentalism has its factions and sects.  The pantheist wing believes the sun god has produced only about 40% of the bounty it promised when a vast acreage in the California desert was devoted to its solar-paneled places of worship.  The power of wind loses believers every time flocks of birds, and not all of them virgins, are slaughtered when the wind is high.  Little wonder that non-believers are grumbling about the tithes, known commonly as subsidies, exacted from them to support these sources of energy.  Factionalism has not yet escalated to schism.  Sun, wind, abstinence-believers in all of these unite around one single proposition: The fires that burn when fossil fuels are alight must be extinguished.  Although deniers of this proposition are not tolerated, doubters remain.  One such group consists of former deniers who have come around to a belief that something must be done, that the pope and the President can’t both be wrong.  The second group consists of doubters willing to concede that environmental religion might contain some enduring truths.  These skeptics are not certain that the evil environmentalists seek to expunge is real, and have a nagging suspicion that it is concocted for the purpose of devolving more and more power to the environmental priesthood.  All of these groups, from some 200 countries, are preparing for a synod in Paris in December.  Political leaders of the G7 industrialized countries want to “decarbonize” the global economy over the course of this century.  Less-developed countries think that is a great idea, as long as richer countries mobilize from public and private sources the $100 billion per year they have been promising to the poorer countries by way of penance for developing their wealthy economies with fossil fuels.  Barack Obama, who frequently seeks forgiveness for the sins he believes America has committed, will happily make promises for others to keep.  Obama and like-minded European leaders will now have the moral authority of the pope behind them.  Perhaps the papal legions can combine with people more sensitive to the fiscal reforms a carbon tax would make possible, to produce a sensible result in Paris.  True believers are not naturally given to compromise, or to worries about the cost in human misery of achieving their growth-stifling dreams.

(“The climate change crusade gains a prominent leader” by Irwin M. Stelzer dated July 6, 2015 published by The Weekly Standard at http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/environmental-religions_978679.html )


Agenda 21 started 23 years ago with a non-binding resolution for an “Agenda for the 21st Century” at a U.N. Earth Summit.  It emerged out of an imaginary concern that the earth would run out of resources, includes a fear of overpopulation and crowding out other species, and has grown to encompass such vague environmental causes as “climate change” and redistributing resources in the name of social justice.  Ultimately, its goal is a radical transformation of society.  The movement uses feel-good words like “livable communities” and “smart growth” to suck people in to thinking it’s positive and harmless.  Agenda 21 is amorphous and pervades every aspect of life and law, and there’s no limit to how far it will go.  The ultimate goal is to eliminate most private property, along with all those nasty, dirty cars and appliances that run on power.  Much of Agenda 21 was based on the claim that runaway global warming was just around the next corner, or no, wait, the next corner; or no wait, the … Well, you get the idea.  Realizing they had a growing credibility problem on their hands, they changed the terminology to “climate change,” a beautifully supple term that could be used to justify anything, because the climate will always change regardless of what we do or don’t do.  Agenda 21 grew out of a combination of liberal guilt in wealthier countries combined with envy from totalitarian countries struggling under the weight of their leviathan governments.  Together, they are implementing punitive measures in first-world countries and transferring resources to the statist governments, where it is frequently squandered. Many of the totalitarian governments, like China, choose to ignore Agenda 21, giving them a competitive advantage over countries like the U.S. who dutifully saddle themselves with more and more of Agenda 21’s rules for virtuous living.  Proponents write off opponents as paranoid conspiracy theorists, and continually point to the fact the initial resolution was non-binding, but what they aren’t admitting is that it has been enacted piecemeal throughout America with thousands and thousands of new rules and regulations that are binding.  As the U.N. adopts more resolutions and directives, they gradually make their way into American rules and regulations.  If this trend is allowed to continue unchecked if and when enough rules and regulations have been implemented everywhere, it will begin to resemble full-fledged global government of the elite, where the U.S. adopts whatever rules the U.N. sets.  The federal government now owns almost 30% of the land in the U.S., even more in the Western states, and that doesn’t even include state and locally owned lands, but that won’t stop Agenda 21 proponents from taking control of even more land.  Agenda 21 is not a conspiracy; it’s creeping, out-in-the-open socialism.  

(“Agenda 21 is Real, Far creepier than Area 51, and is Coming Soon to a Suburb Near You” by Rachel Alexander dated July 10, 2015 published by The Stream at https://stream.org/next-step-agenda-21-eliminating-single-family-homes-seattle/ )


The Mexico immigration system welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society, contributing to national progress.  Mexican immigration law is very clear:  Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country.  Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned.  Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons.  Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony.  Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law.  The Mexican constitution expressly forbids non-citizens to participate in the country’s political life.  The Mexican constitution denies fundamental property rights to foreigners.  The Mexican constitution denies equal employment rights to immigrants, even legal ones, in the public sector.  Foreigners are forbidden to own land in Mexico within 100 kilometers of land borders or within 50 kilometers of the coast.  The president of Mexico must be a Mexican citizen by birth, and his parents must also be Mexican-born citizens.  While these rules may seem harsh, this is how Mexico handles immigration, both legal and illegal, from both her northern and southern borders.  If Donald Trump makes his way to the White House, he will adopt Mexico’s immigration law as our own, because “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

(“Immigration Policy, Mexican Style” by Brain C. Joondeph dated July 10, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/immigration_policy_mexican_style.html )


Greece is formally in default on its loans and in the weeks ahead as more IMF and EU loans come due, Greece is about to slide into fiscal oblivion.  Financial collapse is the natural and unavoidable consequence of socialism everywhere it has been tried.  There are no “good” options for now to end this Greek tragedy.   It’s best for Greece to take the least bad option, which would be forced bankruptcy.   Let Greece go bankrupt, and then let this once rich nation, hit the restart button to rebuild its economy.  Put Greece under receivership and let these new authorities figure out how to manage the debt and decide who will take a hair cut – pensioners, bond holders, welfare recipients, government workers, the IMF.  Wall Street investors worry about the entire world economy collapsing as creditors flee the sovereign debt of one nation after another: Spain, Argentina, Venezuela, Puerto Rico, Portugal, with obese welfare states, leaky pension systems, and declining tax collections.  For six years the brainiacs at the International Monetary Fund and the European Union have devised one bailout and debt restructuring scheme after another, and none of them have worked.  They have only saddled the Greek citizens with even more long term debt that can’t be paid back.  Greece is now sitting on $350 billion of debt which is unpayable and the international monetary experts are deluding themselves into believing that by some magic stroke, this nation of 11 million citizens will sometime in the future come up with the funds to repay it.  Greece is already overtaxed, and adding more taxing the few businesses that are still functioning is only going to ensure their eventual demise too.  Meanwhile the Greek citizens have come to the conclusion that fat pensions and cradle to grave welfare benefits are a human right that can never be taken away.   Suddenly socialism has radically reduced the standard of living of the citizens.  The Greek citizens are simply living way, way beyond their means.  This is a nation with an average retirement age of 60.  This is a nation that has one in four adults unemployed and half of its young people out of work.  Bankruptcy and default will force everyone to take a hit.  Creditors may get 50 cents on the dollar owed depending on how bleak the finances really are in Athens.  Welfare benefits will have to be slashed.  Pensions for retirees will be cut based on the new reality of Greece’s finances.  When Detroit failed for bankruptcy, it allowed the Motor City to in effect start over economically.  The city is financially cut off from much borrowing.  Government workers have been laid off.  Benefits have finally been trimmed.  And guess what? Detroit is making a comeback.  Real estate values are rising.  Construction is beginning again.  In a decade, Detroit could be a financially sound and desirable place to live and do business.  One implication of this solution is that investors may start to view sovereign debt as risky, not risk free.  They will charge nations, especially those that have massive unfunded liabilities, higher interest rates on their debt.  Making it harder for bloated governments to borrow would be a positive development.  More money would flow to the private sector, and less to governments.  The big lie is that Greece has already lived through austerity.  This is a nation that in 2013 was spending up to 59% of its GDP on government benefits and programs.  Even today the government accounts for half of all spending.  The problem is as the private economy shrinks, the government’s role keeps expanding.  Greece’s debt was 120% of GDP a decade ago, and now its 175%.  This is the opposite of austerity; it is a spendfestGreece needs much less socialism, and much more privatization.  Sell off government assets. Cut tax rates.  Oust the communists who ruined this nation. Get government spending down to 25% of GDP!  Then shut down the IMF and World Bank which helped create these debt crises in the first place.   These institutions haven’t averted financial crises. They have enabled them through their lending policies that are the equivalent of giving crack cocaine hits to drug addicts.  That story never ends well, and, alas, Greece is the first tragic example of that lesson. 

(“As Greece collapses, the big loser is socialism” by Stephen Moore dated July 6, 2015 published at Fox News at http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/06/as-greece-collapses-big-loser-is-socialism.html )


There is so much published each week that unless you search for it, you will miss important breaking news.  I try to package the best of this information into my “Views on the News” each Saturday morning.  Updates have been made this week to the following sections:

·    National Culture at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/Culture/philosophy.php

·    Civil Rights at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/Culture/civilrights.php

·    Economy at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/dp/economy.php


David Coughlin

Hawthorne, NY