City Administrator Craig Malin unilaterally changed the name of the day, in many cases a workday holiday in the private sector and the public sector. This is yet another cultural warrior issue, as elitist, condescending progressives attempt to codify political correctness; it's bad enough that we have to deal with petty objections to Nativity scenes, use of the term 'Christmas', memorial crosses, and displays of the Ten Commandments.
I don't really want to give these petty acts of incivility from morally self-superior progressives oxygen; recognizing traditional events and treating them respectfully do not constitute an undue burden on those not sharing those beliefs. In fact, I've had professional colleagues and/or friends whom have celebrated Passover, Ramadan, or Raksha Bandhan (which I, having 4 little sisters, find endearing). If a non-Christian wants to regard a Christian holiday as a secular holiday, I don't have a problem with that. But arbitrarily renaming a traditional holiday is profoundly disrespectful; for example, I wouldn't go to Israel and insist that they rename Passover 'Family Dinner Day' because I'm not Jewish.
I am not a resident of Davenport, but if I was, I would call for Mr. Craig Malin's resignation or termination. I don't think a public sector manager has any business abusing power to promote a point of view contrary to the views and values of the community citizens; public sector employment is a privilege, not a right.
Jobs Up Modestly; Official Unemployment Unchanged
The government announced today that the economy added 162,000 jobs while the unemployment rate remains unchanged at 9.7%. Of course, we've lost roughly 8 million jobs since the end of 2007, and we need to keep in mind we have had some temporary hiring for the US Census. The idea that we've added jobs but the unemployment number is unchanged is counterintuitive to many people; this has to deal with the fact people who have given up on actively seeking employment over the past few weeks are not counted as part of the labor force. Keep in mind--we've had the unemployment rate go from 10% to 9.7%, despite only one prior month under the Obama Presidency have we seen added jobs; this was an artifact of more discouraged workers dropping out of the labor force.
Obama and Pelosi take any increase as validation of progressive economic policy and last year's ineffectual Democratic Party Stimulus Bill, which of course never lived up to its key criterion of keeping unemployment capped at 8%. But, in fact, the Obama Administration heavy-handed involvement in the private sector, including its meddling with the domestic auto industry, its business tax policies (including increased investment tax, reverting to Clinton-era high tax brackets, increased energy taxes via proposed cap-and-trade, and taxes and penalties in the recent health care deformation bill), its aggressive expansion of dubious regulatory efforts (e.g., financial industry deformation and national insurance regulatory authority), its antagonistic approach to free trade agreements, its punitive tax policies (e.g., a take-back on tax-free status of private sector retiree drug prescription plans, a threatened bank transaction fee, and its characterization of deferred taxable basis in corporation taxes abroad (this has become an issue because American business taxes are globally uncompetitive) as a "loophole"), not to mention its recent decision during the budget reconciliation bill to nationalize student college loans.
I listened to FNC reporters this morning discuss the fact that businesses are parking on over $1T of cash--which could be used to fund business expansion, upgrade its technology, hire new personnel, etc. Why aren't they? Clearly adverse public policy is a major concern, and it is plausible that businesses are worried about a potential double-dip recession. I've been mentioning for months that the best thing Obama could do is to declare a moratorium on new policies, to limit new spending to relief spending, and to defer tax increases to the job creator tax brackets. The basic point is all of these elements produces fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the minds of business executives and entrepreneurs. Obama, on the other hand, is looking at the situation from temporary political advantage--huge, almost unprecedented margins in both houses of Congress; he realizes that presidents traditionally lose seats in Congress during mid-terms (the 2002 election was an exception to the rule), and so he is attempting to run up the score on progressive legislation before the mid-terms force him to negotiate with Republicans. This strategy may make sense from a political ideological perspective, but it is a radically anti-business agenda, and that is adversely affecting job growth.
To be sure, Obama is talking a good game in terms of small business tax cuts, but it's much of the same old same old liberal game of picking winners and losers--selective tax breaks? Well, let's recall what Speaker Pelosi said in a different context: "itsy-bitsy spider, little teeny tiny… you can’t do it. Doing this incrementally just doesn’t work." We need BROAD-BASED business tax reform. Instead of trying to radically favor certain elements of the economy and trying to influence where Americans should find jobs, Obama, Pelosi and the other progressives need to do a reality check and help the broad-based economy, which opens up the widest opportunity for job growth where applicants are likely to find suitable jobs.
Urologist Pissed Off at Passage of ObamaCare
Political Cartoon
Mike Lester points out the moral hazard creep intrinsic to progressive Democratic politics in general: raise household income eligibility for SCHIP; raise income eligibility for Medicaid; (briefly presented by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid during the Senate deliberations on health care deformation) lower income eligibility for Medicare; and stretching the date adult children can be covered under their parents' health care insurance policy. As someone who has paid his own room, board and other expenses since leaving for college at 16, I'm just astonished; does anyone really believe that shifting health care expenses of young adults to existing household policies is going to save money? In fact, young adults are generally among the best health risks and should qualify for the lowest premiums, not to mention the fact that most adults have been in the workforce for at least 4 years by that time, with many, if not most employers offering health insurance.
Quote of the Day
The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.
Bishop W.C. Magee
Musical Interlude: More Recent Neil Diamond Hits
"The Story of My Life"
"Oh Mary"
"Marry Me" (with Buffy Lawson)
"Pretty Amazing Grace"
