Let me start by saying that I am not necessarily a supporter of Texas secession. While Texas could certainly survive, and likely thrive as an idependent nation, there are more pros to remaining in the union at this time. Those that mock our governor for his "secession talk" need to listen to what he actually said. His words were more of an affirmation of the 10th Amendment limitation of Federal Governmental powers. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." On April 14, Perry expressed his “unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the 10th Amendment.” OUR COUNTRY = The United States, not Texas! He also noted that he and “millions of Texans are tired of Washington, D.C., trying to come down here and tell us how to run Texas.” Are such views “extreme”? Do they not, rather, reflect mainstream and historically accurate sentiments? After all, is not the resolution Perry supported simply a reaffirmation of the very words of and the philosophy underlying the 10th Amendment?
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not a cheerleader for, or even a great supporter of our Governor, but I dislike those that attribute sentiments to anyone in office that have not been expressed by the politician in question. This is the same thing as those that call the President a terrorist sympathizer. In short, people need to take off their partisan glasses and look at what is best for the country and its citizens. Neither party has it right at this point, and the infighting is only going to make things worse.
Obama's "stimulus" packages have been sold as a way out of this crisis, but simple high school economics tells you that you cannot spend your way to recovery. Supporters of this idea think that "taxing the rich" will pay for it, but taxing those that create jobs has been proven time and again to deplete the number of available jobs. Think of it on a household level. If you have someone coming to maintain your lawn for $150 per month, and your income drops (for whatever reason) by $300 per month... You are not only going to cancel the lawn service, but find other ways to cut to maintain your lifestyle. You have just added another person the the unemployment rolls. Does this make you evil? No! You are simply being pragmatic. "The rich" are where they are in life (in general) through hard work and pragmatism.
While many people disagree with the principles of "Reaganomics", the reality is that it has never been tried or given a chance to work. The partial implimentation in the 80s still resulted in historical economic growth. In general, there are four principles that must be applied:
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not a cheerleader for, or even a great supporter of our Governor, but I dislike those that attribute sentiments to anyone in office that have not been expressed by the politician in question. This is the same thing as those that call the President a terrorist sympathizer. In short, people need to take off their partisan glasses and look at what is best for the country and its citizens. Neither party has it right at this point, and the infighting is only going to make things worse.
Obama's "stimulus" packages have been sold as a way out of this crisis, but simple high school economics tells you that you cannot spend your way to recovery. Supporters of this idea think that "taxing the rich" will pay for it, but taxing those that create jobs has been proven time and again to deplete the number of available jobs. Think of it on a household level. If you have someone coming to maintain your lawn for $150 per month, and your income drops (for whatever reason) by $300 per month... You are not only going to cancel the lawn service, but find other ways to cut to maintain your lifestyle. You have just added another person the the unemployment rolls. Does this make you evil? No! You are simply being pragmatic. "The rich" are where they are in life (in general) through hard work and pragmatism.
While many people disagree with the principles of "Reaganomics", the reality is that it has never been tried or given a chance to work. The partial implimentation in the 80s still resulted in historical economic growth. In general, there are four principles that must be applied:
- reduce the growth of government spending,
- reduce income and capital gains marginal tax rates,
- reduce government regulation of the economy,
- control the money supply to reduce inflation.
In the past, the marginal tax rates have been reduced, and are now climbing back up, resulting in lower revenue collections as we pass the critical point. Government regulation of the economy is at record highs, as are job losses, and this is not a coincidence. I am not saying that complete de-regulation is the answer either, as that would result in atrocious working conditions and run-away inflation... or worse yet... Carter era "stagflation". What is actually needed is simple regulation/oversight, with the freedom to let capitalism actually work. Right now, the noose is so tight that the free markets are unable to function, and the crashes in the economy are the natural result. Control of the money supply to reduce inflation will never happen as long as the Federal Reserve is in charge of the monetary policy. Since this is an extra-governmental agency, it is outside of the control of those that need to be able to control it. That's why the constitution specifically grants CONGRESS the power "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures". Congress has un-constitutionally ceded this right to the Federal Reserve, which operates under an appointee of the Executive branch, and this needs to be fixed.
Finally, "the reduction in the growth of government spending"... This has never been tried, and frankly is the key to getting the nation back on track. Earmarks, pork, automatic annual budget increases, and generally out of control spending by both parties must stop. Many people are blaming the current spending spree on President Obama, while others are blaming President Bush. The reality is that they are, or are on track to be two of the most fiscally irresponsible Presidents in US History! It is not a partisan issue, but a financial one. If your expenses at home go up, you cannot go to your boss and write yourself a check for the difference, but this is exactly what is happening in Congress. It has now spread to bailing out large private companies, because everyone involved is paranoid of another Worldcom or Enron. While GM, Chrysler, and AIG may not be the result of corruption, the result of failure would be the same. Another smaller company (or companies) will expand and fill the gap left, and the American people will dust themselves off, and move on. Our ability to do so is what makes this country great, and why our Republic has stood the test of time for over 200 years under the same governing documents.
Returning to secession... Texas could survive secession, and in all likelihood would thrive. The map at the left is interesting in that it places each state in perspective with respect to national GDP of various countries. It does not address population, but I'll cover that in a minute.
Texas' annual GDP is roughly equivalent to that of Canada, which is considered a fairly prosperous "First World" nation in its own right. They are the 13th largest GDP among nations, and sit at around 10% of US GDP. This means that if Texas were to leave the union, we would immediately take that spot (and roughly 10% of the US economy) with us. When you address the per-capita aspect, Texas is at roughly 2/3 of the population of Canada, making per capita GDP about a third higher for Texans, if secession were to happen. Texas also happens to be home to one of the largest military installations in the free world (Fort Hood). Obviously, equipment would transfer to the US, but Texas would quite likely maintain a pretty significant military strength, so the weak argument that we would "lose the protection" of the US military just doesn't hold water. Frankly, we could pretty quickly turn ourselves into a powerful nation both economically and militarily. There would be no issue with maintaining our independence, and becoming a presence on the world stage.
Now... Is this what I want to happen? Is this what is best for Texas and the US? Short answer... Heck No! There are far more intricate issues involved than the simplistic economic picture that I have painted above, and military power can only go so far in carving your place in the world. What needs to happen is a return to sanity and responsibilty from both our Federal and our State representatives... And, I'll say it... Sanity among the voters that keep putting these clowns in office just because they have an R or a D behind their name. Stop voting party, and research the issues! You may still end up voting for a straight party ticket, but it will be an educated opinion. Don't vote based on wanting to stick it to the rich or put something in your own pocket (either through tax cuts or government handouts). History has shown that balanced policies work far better than extreme partaisanship. But the new administration seems hell-bent on deriding the "failed policies of the past"... and the previous administration was just as tenacious in their single-mindedness. If this sort of back and forth extremism continues, we are doomed to failure... and we deserve what we get.
Finally, "the reduction in the growth of government spending"... This has never been tried, and frankly is the key to getting the nation back on track. Earmarks, pork, automatic annual budget increases, and generally out of control spending by both parties must stop. Many people are blaming the current spending spree on President Obama, while others are blaming President Bush. The reality is that they are, or are on track to be two of the most fiscally irresponsible Presidents in US History! It is not a partisan issue, but a financial one. If your expenses at home go up, you cannot go to your boss and write yourself a check for the difference, but this is exactly what is happening in Congress. It has now spread to bailing out large private companies, because everyone involved is paranoid of another Worldcom or Enron. While GM, Chrysler, and AIG may not be the result of corruption, the result of failure would be the same. Another smaller company (or companies) will expand and fill the gap left, and the American people will dust themselves off, and move on. Our ability to do so is what makes this country great, and why our Republic has stood the test of time for over 200 years under the same governing documents.
Returning to secession... Texas could survive secession, and in all likelihood would thrive. The map at the left is interesting in that it places each state in perspective with respect to national GDP of various countries. It does not address population, but I'll cover that in a minute. Texas' annual GDP is roughly equivalent to that of Canada, which is considered a fairly prosperous "First World" nation in its own right. They are the 13th largest GDP among nations, and sit at around 10% of US GDP. This means that if Texas were to leave the union, we would immediately take that spot (and roughly 10% of the US economy) with us. When you address the per-capita aspect, Texas is at roughly 2/3 of the population of Canada, making per capita GDP about a third higher for Texans, if secession were to happen. Texas also happens to be home to one of the largest military installations in the free world (Fort Hood). Obviously, equipment would transfer to the US, but Texas would quite likely maintain a pretty significant military strength, so the weak argument that we would "lose the protection" of the US military just doesn't hold water. Frankly, we could pretty quickly turn ourselves into a powerful nation both economically and militarily. There would be no issue with maintaining our independence, and becoming a presence on the world stage.
Now... Is this what I want to happen? Is this what is best for Texas and the US? Short answer... Heck No! There are far more intricate issues involved than the simplistic economic picture that I have painted above, and military power can only go so far in carving your place in the world. What needs to happen is a return to sanity and responsibilty from both our Federal and our State representatives... And, I'll say it... Sanity among the voters that keep putting these clowns in office just because they have an R or a D behind their name. Stop voting party, and research the issues! You may still end up voting for a straight party ticket, but it will be an educated opinion. Don't vote based on wanting to stick it to the rich or put something in your own pocket (either through tax cuts or government handouts). History has shown that balanced policies work far better than extreme partaisanship. But the new administration seems hell-bent on deriding the "failed policies of the past"... and the previous administration was just as tenacious in their single-mindedness. If this sort of back and forth extremism continues, we are doomed to failure... and we deserve what we get.
No comments:
Post a Comment