Surrounded by his Council of Economic Advisers on Monday (video linked at The Corner), Obama was asked questions about the stimulus, specifically about "shovel ready" projects. The questioner pointed out all the regulation that prevents something from being "shovel ready" and then (admittedly snidely) mocks the president by asserting of course the President was aware of these things.
The President responded by saying that "shovel ready was not as..... uh..... shovel ready as we expected." He was trying to make a joke. Instead, he revealed a lot more than he realized. In short, he answered the question that no, he was not aware how much bureaucracy there is. He just seemed to think that if you threw enough money at a public works project, it would complete itself automatically. He neglected to remember the zoning approvals, the permit approvals, the environmental impact statements, the frequent "investments" (i.e. bribes) a company has to pay the city council in other public works projects, etc. Then he failed to remember the inevitable court challenges, appeals, re-zoning, re-acquiring of permits, more environmental impact statements, and more "investments" to the newly elected city councilman to fund a motorized merry-go-round in the local park, which will require even more paperwork.
If it requires this much paperwork to fixed cracked cement, just wait til we see how much paperwork is required when it comes to managing health care! President Obama has spent 3 years talking about the wonders of government, and how only government control can "win the future." Yet government control provided the mess we currently see and Obama decries.
In a Tuesday morning Interview with the Today show, President Obama decided it was time to pander to the Luddite constituency:
"There are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don't go to a bank teller, or you go to the airport and you're using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate."We can ignore the fact that both the ATM and kiosk have been used for at least the past two decades, and they didn't seem to hinder unemployment. In this statement is a weary resignation that the modern world has overtaken America, and there is nothing she can do about it. Jimmy Carter could not have said it better himself. Rather than viewing technology as a problem to be avoided, smart economies embrace technology as ways to drive innovation. For Mr. Hope and Change, innovation (change) is now the enemy.
It also shows how colossally ignorant he is about economics. He is correct, most of the time you withdraw money, you do so electronically. This reduces the time tellers spend withdrawing money. Yet before the recession, there were more bank tellers employed than before ATM's were introduced, and the amount of bank branches exploded. Why? If you want an ATM card, you have to sign up with that bank still. More people signing up for this convenience means you need more banks. In addition to using the services of ATM's, people also use banks for other purposes. In order to facilitate those purposes, you need more human tellers. The same goes for the kiosks at airports. Instead of waiting in line for hours (outside of security) to check in, now you can simply sign in yourself and be cleared in under 30 seconds as checked in. This gives us less waiting at the airport, allows enhanced productivity outside of the airport, or allows us to spend absurd amounts in the airport gift shop, whatever. Since flying was made easier, more people were flying.
You could in theory increase employment in those industries by wishing away these technological advances, just as candle makers would benefit from abolishing the sun and horse drivers would benefit from eliminating the automobile. Yet this wouldn't cause economic growth. We would be a lot less efficient. If ATM's were abolished, consumer spending would plummet and banking enrollment would decline. Like the shovel ready "joke", it shows a President so out of touch with reality it is painful. Yet this mindset drives this blatantly anti-market administration.
On Thursday, the members of that market (many of them rich businessmen Obama hopes to court) had a meeting with Chief of Staff William Daley. Daley was supposed to be the smart businessman who would restore Obama's relationship with the business community after their trial separation in November of 2010. If Marriage Counselor Daley wants to save this marriage, it will require a lot of work. After highlighting all of the anti-business regulation the government has, Daley simply threw his hands up and said screw it when he declared "some things you just can't defend." Not very reassuring to the business community, or anyone else. The government is hopelessly bloated, and many of the policies (some even championed by his boss) just aren't defensible. First it was the economy that is out of control. Then it was technology. Now it is the federal government itself. The Obama administration has resigned itself to these three apparent facts.
Which begs the question: if the President is resigned to these facts, will he please make way for someone who isn't?
No comments:
Post a Comment