Most TV talking heads have us believing that our short term economic recovery requires us to spend ourselves into financial oblivion. They say that curtailing runaway government spending right now would be repeating the mistake made by the Japanese government in the 1990s, which ultimately caused its economy to flat line into a "lost decade." The point resonates with many Americans who believe that "you don't get something for nothing," that there is indeed no "free lunch," and financial sacrifice is the only path to economic salvation. They believe that high (even hyper-) inflation, high taxes, the continued and deep devaluation of the dollar and slow economic growth are merely the penance for our financial sins.

The fact is that the spending spree of the past year has done very little to stimulate our economy. The timely, temporary and targeted stimulus package outlined by economic advisor Larry Summers never actually materialized. Instead, the Obama-blessed Pelosi-Reid $787 billion abomination of gratuitous spending and political pork turned out to be untimely (most of the money still hasn't been spent) and targeted just about everything EXCEPT projects designed to pay immediate economic dividends and put Americans back to work. Besides all the pork, a significant portion of the stimulus money was earmarked to prop up state governments and social welfare programs designed to provide a safety net to Americans in greatest need. Helping Americans in need is a noble cause, but using the money for consumption instead of for investment in America's business prosperity does not stimulate the economy.

The good news is that if we scrap all that nonsensical spending right now and fund a plan that actually targets stimulating the economy, we may be able to have our cake and eat it too-- a robust recovery in the near term and a chance for long term prosperity. If our political leaders come to their senses and call off the stimulus waste-fest, nix multi-trillion dollar Obamacare and anti-business Cap and Trade, and redirect a fraction of those savings toward creating jobs, we may just start growing again. Robust growth will mean lower deficits, lower deficits will reduce the need for higher taxes and the impetus for high inflation, and just might save the US dollar from near extinction on the world stage. That lunch wouldn't be free, but it would be cheaper and provide leftovers that could be used to fund responsible healthcare reform and other social goodies!

By: Joe DelCasino
More articles by this author are available at http://joedelcasino.blogspot.com Books are available at http://www.Xlibris.com.

You know the story. The evil step mother and the two ugly step sisters take advantage of the beautiful and neglected Cinderella. This is a metaphor of our economic times. In my story the evil step mother is big government and the ugly step sisters are banks too big to fail and fat Wall Street companies. Obama is the cool Prince and small business is Cinderella.

Cinderella kept the household alive by doing all the filthy chores and she was constantly at the beck and call of the other 3 women. The Prince was looking for a wife and announced a grand ball. The mother went into high gear planning the wardrobe for her two invited daughters. Cinderella did the work and prepared the dresses. She wasn't invited but dreamed of attending. The sisters taunted her, saying she would never be welcome at such a high affair.

Cinderella cried after the sisters left. Her resourceful Fairy Godmother appeared and turned her rags into a gown, a pumpkin into a carriage, mice into horses, a rat into a coachman, and lizards into footmen. She went to the ball and won the Prince's heart. (The Fairy Godmother represents wisdom and common business sense.) Hopefully you remember about the clock striking midnight, the slipper, and the Prince with "The Audacity of Hope". He searched for his true love, his meaning, and answers to the fears and problems in his kingdom.

Obama has pulled out all the stops to save our economy, but he has only invited the ugly sisters (banks too big to fail and Wall Street). Small business, like Cinderella, has not been invited to the party. I bet there were not many small business owners at his recent $15,000 a plate fundraisers. Small business represents 70% of our economy. They are THE answer to the unemployment problem. Small business people are the innovators turning pumpkins into carriages and mice into workers.

Big government and Prince Obama gave GM $50 billion back in the summer to keep them in business. Since then they have closed dealerships, factories, and layed off thousands. There are 5 million small businesses in this country. Imagine how many jobs would have been created if that money had been given to them. Have a contest and give the money to the biggest and best ideas. Reward creativity for a change instead of companies skilled in trading derivatives and other sneaky financial games. Tell small businesses that if they hire new people their payroll taxes will be eliminated for one year. The unemployment rate will be gone in a month.

Barack has the slipper. It won't fit the fat feet of Wall Street. He needs to search the heartland, the rust belt, companies with 20 employees, and small towns to find what works in this country. The clock is striking midnight.

By: William H Watson
http://www.questionsbybill.com

The Democrats' health care legislation, as is or in very similar form, cannot be passed. Every choice point they encounter from this stage on leads to an internal contradiction or a dead end. To use a mathematical metaphor, their situation is overdetermined: there are too many conflicting restrictions; there is no solution to their dilemma. (To use a liberal metaphor: It's a slam dunk!)

Democratic proponents of health care reform have the following major goals:

(1) Create a federal public health insurance option to "compete with" private insurers, or

(2) Set up state cooperatives to "compete with" private insurers on a state-by-state basis;

(3) Prevent discrimination by insurance companies based on preexisting condition-i.e., forbid insurance companies from "providing insurance";

(4) Limit the ratio of high-to-low insurance premiums by age group.

Whether pursuing any of these goals is the government's business-and it isn't-Democrats need to enact some combination of these proposals in order to fulfill their aim of turning us into Canada; the Congressional Budget Office estimates that this will cost about $1 trillion.

Democrats have proposed numerous bad ideas for paying for their legislation, all of which lead to intractable circumstances that they cannot tolerate politically with the general electorate, even if they were able to figure out a way to cobble together, rush through, or force the votes in Congress to pass them, including:

(1) Increase the deficit: This would violate Obama's promise that health care reform will be "dime"-neutral.

(2) Make taxpayers subsidize the public option: This would keep the government plan from having to cut costs or be efficient to attract and retain customers, as any private insurance company must. It would therefore eventually force those who are satisfied with their current plans to pay higher premiums or get less for their money.

(3) Cut $500 billion in Medicare: This would upset seniors, and anyone who plans to be a senior at some point in his life, who fear rationing of care.

(4) Tax high-cost plans at a 40% rate: This would anger emergency workers and union members, and huge numbers of people who will hit the non-insurance-adjusted premium threshold for this level of taxation in the next 10 years.

(5) Impose fees on insurance and pharmaceutical companies: These costs would simply be passed on to doctors, who would in turn dump them on to patients.

(6) Cap deductions for health savings accounts: This would increase out-of-pocket medical expenses.

(7) Force everyone to buy government-approved health insurance by charging a penalty for not having coverage: If the penalty were low, in order to avoid making it burdensome, then people would wait to get coverage until they became sick, then drop coverage after they recovered, which means the penalty would be useless. If the penalty were high, in order to make it effective, then the public would be infuriated over the imposition of a costly penalty for not buying something that should be optional.

(8) Cover fewer uninsured people: This would involve turning the nation's health care system upside down while failing to fulfill the basic aim of the plan.

In case Democrats are interested, there are provisions to which they could agree, all previously proposed in legislation by House Republicans, which would actually pay for the proposed plan. These steps should be taken anyway, and should be pursued instead of the Democrats' aims, but just for the record, they include:

(1) Medical liability tort reform: This would reduce settlement amounts and lower doctors' malpractice insurance premiums.

(2) Tax deductions for health insurance premiums, medical expenses, and prescriptions: This would allow people to decide how to allocate their earnings toward medical expenses, which they can do more efficiently than Kathleen "Jolly Roger" Sebelius.

(3) Vouchers for opting out of Medicare: This would allow people to decide how to spend their money on medical care in old age.

(4) Interstate provision of private insurance: This would allow for greater competition and cost-cutting.

Despite conservatives' nail-biting uncertainty over their ability to defeat HR 3200, they have one advantage: the truth. All the arguments conservatives have advanced against liberals' bad ideas are informed by it, whereas liberals must disguise it, distort it, downplay it, or lie about it to persuade anyone that their impossible legislative feat and fevered social engineering fantasy can be achieved. There are plenty of voters and legislators who are content to ignore the truth and stumble down dead ends, but enough may turn out to be smart and honest enough to see through these efforts and find their way out of the labyrinth.

By: Scott Spiegel
http://www.scottspiegel.com

For lots of us pre-boomers, this politically correct stuff seems contrived at best and plain stupid at worst. It has only been the past decade or so that those wanting to control what we think, by changing what we're allowed to say and do on a daily basis, have edged their way into the mainstream of American life.

Back when we pre-boomers were kids (those born between 1930 and 1945) everyone enjoyed the Christmas season. We had a Christmas play at school attended by parents. Throughout the several weeks leading up to Christmas we sang carols every day. There was always a pageant put on by the kids in the higher grades, and we were read "Christmas Story" from the bible at assembly in the auditorium. Each classroom had a tree and a party. Plus Santa made a visit to each room and every child received a small gift provided by the local merchants' association. No one complained in those days.

We celebrated Lincoln's birthday on February 12 followed less than two weeks later by Washington' birthday on the 22nd. We learned about both these great presidents in the classroom and always were entertained by a little performance attended by the entire school. It made the short month go even fasted. This was good because it would be another 6 weeks or so before we had any more time off from school.

Easter vacation was a welcomed break. The school activities were secular in nature with bunnies and egg decorating and usually a play about Peter Rabbit or the like. In the fall, we studied about Columbus but there was no show unless we did a portrayal in our classes. Thanksgiving was always celebrated with the "Story of the First Thanksgiving" with the participants playing the role of Pilgrims or Indians (there was no Native-American lobby in the '40s and '50s), and the kids wore those goofy black hats and bonnets or colorful head-dresses. It was fun as well as a learning opportunity.

Along the way the PC crowd decided our traditions are inappropriate. So the Christmas holidays are now "Winter Vacation" and the only entertainment kids are exposed to in school are symbols and songs that don't offend anyone. Carols are out because they allude to the religious aspects of Christmas, even though this is the reason behind this federal holiday. Santa, trees and decorations are banned from many schools as well.

"Spring Break" is the new name for Easter vacation. And there's talk of changing Columbus Day to "Fall Day," because the man who discovered America was harsh in the way he treated the Indians -- remember, he set out to find a new trade route to India. Unfortunately, most explorers were not gentle with the inhabitants of the places they claimed for their countries, and the natives weren't always happy to see them, but it is part of history. The PCs haven't attack Thanksgiving yet, but it's only a matter of time.

So, the only way our grandchildren and great grandchildren are going to learn about the traditions that were such a rich part of our lives is for us to tell them the stories from our childhood. They'll love it, and so will you.

By: Don Potter
Don Potter, a Philadelphia native, was born in 1936 and is a 50 year veteran of the advertising agency business. Now living in Los Angeles, he has written two novels in retirement, frequently writes on marketing issues, and has a blog dedicated to pre-boomers (those born between 1930 and 1945).

Read more articles for and about pre-boomers with thoughts, comments and opinions designed to spark thinking, foster discussion, and stimulate debate by logging on to http://www.pre-boomermusings.com