Blagnet.net

Barack Obama, window breaker extraordinaire

Barack Obama and all of his Democratic supporters have already exposed themselves as true economic ignoramuses. It isn’t getting any better. The veritable hero among knaves in the mainstream media, John Stossel, writes:

Wow. Five million new jobs. All that work building windmills and creating biofuels are the “green jobs” that will come into existence when wise government creates the industries that will produce the energy and vehicles that will make fossil fuels obsolete.

Politicians always promise that their programs will create jobs. It’s used to justify building palatial sports stadiums for wealthy team owners. Alaska Rep. Don Young claimed the infamous “bridge to nowhere” would create jobs (http://tinyurl.com/6jq623). The fallacy is the same in every case: Even if the program creates jobs building bridges or windmills, it necessarily prevents other jobs from being created. This is because government spending merely diverts money from private projects to government projects.

Governments create no wealth. They only move it around while taking a cut for their trouble. So any jobs created over here come at the expense of jobs that would have been created over there. Overlooking this fact is known as the broken-window fallacy (http://tinyurl.com/ydasa2). The French economist Frederic Bastiat pointed out that a broken shop window will create work for a glassmaker, but that work comes only at the expense of the cook or tailor the shopkeeper would have patronized if he didn’t have to replace the window.

Raise your hand if you have ever met a single liberal Democrat who had ever even heard of Frederic Bastiat.

Creating jobs is not difficult for government officials. Pharaohs created thousands of jobs by building pyramids. Our government could create jobs by paying people to dig holes and then fill them up.

Didn’t Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal pay Americans to do exactly that: dig holes and fill them up? I’m not joking, I’m dead serious. I seriously think I read that somewhere. It was something very close to simply digging holes and filling them up.

Would actual wealth be created? Of course not. It would be destroyed. It’s like arguing the hurricanes create jobs. After all, the destruction is followed by rebuilding. But does anyone seriously believe that replacing destroyed buildings creates wealth?

Look at Obama’s plan. His website says:

“Obama will strategically invest $150 billion over 10 years to accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial scale renewable energy, encourage energy efficiency, invest in low emissions coal plants, advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, and begin transition to a new digital electricity grid. The plan will also invest in America’s highly skilled manufacturing workforce and manufacturing centers to ensure that American workers have the skills and tools they need to pioneer the green technologies that will be in high demand throughout the world.” (http://tinyurl.com/6rx4vm).

Note that word “strategically.” It is there to suggest that Obama knows how best to “invest” the $150 billion. (Of course it is not his money, and he’ll have none of his own at risk, so from his perspective, it won’t really be investment.) But how does he know that the things he names ought to get the money? Will he give it to cronies of his campaign contributors? Will he appoint Al Gore to pick grant recipients? Lobbyists will make a fortune steering “green” inventors and promoters to the $150 billion.
[...]
Neither Gore nor Obama can know how the money should best be invested. Investing is about predicting the future, and the future is always uncertain. We know from experience that people who have their own money at risk — who face a profit-and-loss test and possible bankruptcy — are much better predictors than people who play with other people’s money. Just compare North and South Korea.

One reason decentralized markets are preferable to government central planning is that human beings are fallible.

Not our liberal Democratic leaders, and especially not Barack Obama, Algore, and Nancy Pelosi! Humanity at large, if left to its own devices, would be stupid and self-immolating; our glorious elected criminals are spun from a finer clay than the rest of us, however, so we must anoint them to lead us forward into the Glorious Green Future!

If one company invests in plug-in hybrids and it goes bust, only a relatively few people suffer. The assets of the bankrupt firm pass into more capable hands.

But decisions by government, especially the federal government, affect all of us. When government makes a mistake, the bureaucracy can’t go bankrupt. Instead, it will use its failure to justify increased appropriations in the next budget.

If “green jobs” make so much sense, the market will create them. They will be created by private entrepreneurs and venture capitalists who are eager to profit from winning investments. The best ideas will rise to the top, and green energy will gradually replace coal and oil.

If politicians were serious about creating jobs and cleaner technologies, they would step aside and let the free market go to work.

Maybe you’d label this column “vulgar libertarianism” and I couldn’t bring myself to disagree; I mean, we’ve all heard these pragmatic arguments before; but it was worth a post to expose some details of the wealth-destroying, job-destroying plans of Barack Obama and his clueless supporters. It’s great to see someone considered part of the MSM speaking truth to power and idiocy.

Posted in Economics, Environmentalism, Socialism