Repealing the laws of economics

In the last couple of decades we have had market bubbles every few years. We had the dot com bubble. We had the housing bubble that gave rise to a real economic crisis. One wonders why these keep happening.

I am an amateur but I believe that these are caused by big businesses and especially government people believing we can repeal the laws of economics. Certain things have happened every time they are tried. Changes in supply and demand are set down to laws. Defining the variables within the demand and supply curves is more difficult but changes along the demand curve and supply curve are part of economic law.

Stock market transactions are purchases basically of future profit. In the nineties when the stock market created the dot com bubble people were buying future profits that had no chance to ever materialize. Eventually this came to be reality and the bubble burst and we had a recession and the market values got back to their rightful values.

Our housing bubble likewise was caused by people 'repealing' the laws of supply and demand. Demand outstripped supply and values went up at artificial levels. Slowly we are finding out why. Our government in conjunction with many mortgage buyers, lead by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made it policy to get as many people into home ownership as possible. Democrats such as Barney Frank and Republicans such as President Bush were on the same page on this goal. This goal by itself is not a bad goal. All the arguments that were made were good solid arguments. Good citizenship is often a by product of home ownership. None of this can be denied. We are learning now that to accomplish this risky loans were not only granted but pursued and even pushing people to borrow more than they could afford. The borrowers cannot be left out. They signed on to borrow more than they could afford. Again people in the borrowing sector and the loaning sector thought they were smarter than the laws of economics.

When the bubble crashed we did it again. Even though national real estate values went up 50, 60 percent in a short time. These values needed to recover and come back to their natural levels and we wanted someone to do something. No one really knows what we wanted 'them' to do but do something. Today we have multiple bailouts going on. All of these leave me feeling dirty. People on both sides if the borrowing transaction as well as the government looters that made it possible are telling me that it needs to happen. It may need to happen but don't ask me to feel good about it.

Back to present. Our government is printing money it doesn't have in overtime to pay for all these bailouts, and both presidential candidates are telling us what they are going to give us. They like the others are so smart they can super cede the laws of economics. I think the roller coaster is just on the first hill. Adam Smith call your office, or maybe Dagny Taggert.

Hubris

Last night Charlie Gibson asked Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin if she thought it took hubris for her to believe that she is ready today to be President of the United States of America. I think calling himself a journalist takes hubris, but let me examine some examples that I think take hubris.

Matt Damon an actor who knows nothing about Sarah Palin (he admitted so in his interview) believe it is his place to determine that she is scary. I may not be a rocket scientist but if I don't know anything about someone I generally don't call them scary. Maybe it is just me.

Democrat Activists who continually refer to Jesus as a community organizer. My knowledge of Barak Obama's job as community organizer was to lobby and push for a bigger government role in the people's lives. Jesus rarely mentions the government at all other than to tell us "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's". Jesus spoke to individuals about their personal role in our world. In the Sermon on the Mount he never once talked about our views on the role of government in helping the poor, or the infirmed, nor prisoners. He talked about when we meet him on the day of judgement. That is a huge difference as far as I can see. If anything these liberals are outsourcing their role as helping those less fortunate to a government that cannot do it as well.

Feminists and black activists that want us to believe that they speak for all blacks and women. Women and blacks I have known over the years are individuals and sometimes agree with me on things and sometimes disagree. I have known very few women who agree most of the time with Gloria Steinem and Suasan Estrich. How much hubris does it take for Jesse Jackson to believe he can speak for black people? He speaks for Clarence Thomas, Kenneth Blackwell, etc? Absolute Hubris!!

Finally Barak Obama. "I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. " I could quote many more of Obama's statements but this one sums it up pretty good. The rhetorical scenario he throws out there is such: A child of a muti millionaire politician gets pregnant and for no other reason that convenience ends an unborn baby's life because he feels it would be a punishment. Sums up the left wing mind pretty good I think.