Login
Undecided voters from swing states on an MSNBC panel this week declared opposition to President Joe Biden because of his economic failures.
The post Undecided Voters on MSNBC Panel Declare Opposition to Biden appeared first on Breitbart.
The Biden White House claims to have heralded “a great year for American workers” with more jobs created “during any year of the prior Administration.” However, most are part-time or government jobs, paid for by taxpayers. Additionally, the constant influx of illegal immigrants distorts the job market.
The March jobs report shows 303,000 new jobs added. However, most of the jobs were part-time. Meanwhile, year-over-year creation of full-time positions has been in recession territory since December. Even these part-time jobs are largely going to immigrants, including illegal immigrants. Consequently, considering both part-time and full-time employment, there have been almost no jobs created for citizens.
Nearly one-quarter of the new jobs are government jobs, paid for by taxpayers. This percentage is about double the norm for government job creation, which typically falls between 10 and 12 percent. In addition to the fact that government jobs drain taxpayer funds, they also do not represent an investment in the future. Jobs created by a private company today, if successful, will grow and create more jobs in the future. Private companies develop new industries, products, and services that facilitate investment and the development of other private companies. This is why the US economy is much more robust than the economy of a centrally planned, communist country.
Even in communist China, the rapid economic growth of the past few decades was led by the private sector, not the public sector. Another problem with a growing public sector is that it draws talent away from the private sector. People who might otherwise have been inventive or innovative, creating something new in the private sector, will be absorbed into government jobs that produce nothing.
In addition to there not being enough full-time jobs, the job market is also plagued by swings and fluctuations. Inflation is a constant feature of the Biden economy, making markets more susceptible to speculation regarding Fed policy. Usually, as election time nears, the sitting president, running for reelection, will decide that the level of inflation is too low and will cut interest rates to induce an illusory job boom. Signals from the White House and the Fed suggest that they are mulling over such a destructive move now, despite the fact that the US still faces high inflation and has suffered cumulative inflation of over 18% since Biden took office.
Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan is an example of a shortsighted policy that will give people the illusion of a better economy. People who will have thousands of dollars’ worth of debt wiped clean will feel instant relief and forget that every product they buy is more expensive than under Trump. As a populist move, those wishing to have their current or future college debts erased will also vote for Biden.
Like any other government transfer, the student loan forgiveness program is transferring money from taxpayers—who may or may not have been able to afford college—to people who borrowed money, attended college, and will now enjoy the economic benefits of an education at the expense of others. The trillions Biden is giving away through this and other programs, which began during COVID, are driving up the deficit, increasing the debt, and eroding the dollar’s buying power.
There are areas where job creation and real economic growth could be fostered, such as by increasing Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) exports. The energy industry creates highly paid, full-time jobs for non-college graduates, which is something this country is running short of. However, Biden caved to the climate crowd and has halted approvals for export certifications for LNG, a commodity whose price has nearly tripled since sanctions on Russian energy exports reduced the supply to Europe and the world.
Cutting these LNG jobs and revenues is considered a victory for climate activists. However, the Energy and Commerce Committee, along with more than 150 House Republicans, including Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., are working to reverse Biden’s ban on LNG. They argue that demand will remain the same, while Biden is effectively cutting the supply, thus driving up prices. Expanding US LNG exports would bring down prices, create jobs, increase the size of the US economy, and afford the US diplomatic advantages, bringing the US closer to its European allies.
If the Biden economy is considered good, perhaps we should revert to the supposedly bad economy under Trump, where inflation was low, unemployment was low, gas prices were low, illegal immigration was being addressed, and Russia dared not invade Ukraine.
The post Biden Job Creation: Part-time, Government Jobs, and Distorted Unemployment Numbers appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
unemployed_men_during_the_great_depression
bec, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, is disliked by liberal globalists due to the threat he poses to their global agenda, much like Trump.
While Trump vowed to “drain the swamp,” Javier Milei wielded a chainsaw during his campaign, symbolizing his commitment to drastically reducing the size of government.
Most mainstream media label Javier Milei as either a Libertarian or a far-right extremist, a term they now apply to anyone who is less than 100% on board with every single aspect of globalism. However, Milei is also an economics professor and a supporter of the Austrian School of Economics. The Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, serves as a hub for Austrian economics. Its name originates from the Austrian heritage of the school’s early pioneers, including Carl Menger, Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, Friedrich von Wieser, and Friedrich Hayek.
Austrian economics aligns closely with conservative values. It emphasizes personal property rights, limited government intervention, free markets, low taxes, inflation, and debt, and voluntary exchange. Milei’s policies prioritize reducing government involvement, debt, and the welfare rolls while fostering entrepreneurship and protecting property rights. He rightly suggests that by cutting 70,000 government jobs, not only can government size be reduced, but also the deficit and Argentina’s debt problem can be addressed.
Regarding globalism, Austrian economists typically support free trade and international cooperation through voluntary exchange and economic interactions among nations. However, they oppose involvement in supranational organizations that impose policies on sovereign nations, citing conflicts with principles of individual liberty, national sovereignty, and limited government.
The mainstream media characterize Argentina’s Javier Mileii, America’s Donald Trump, Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, and Chile’s José Antonio Kast as the new hard right, sharing three commonalities: fierce opposition to abortion, and gay and women’s rights. However, mainstream media misrepresents their stance on gay and women’s rights. They are only against policies that grant specific groups privileges. Affirmative action, quotas, or preferences in hiring, promotion, or school acceptance based on race, gender, or orientation would be banned.
Indeed, they oppose abortion, but in Argentina, America, Brazil, El Salvador, and Chile, murder is already illegal. These men advocate for extending legal protection to unborn babies.
Interestingly, although most Austrian economists adhere to Christian or Jewish beliefs and operate within a framework of Judeo-Christian values, they oppose abortion for various reasons of economic philosophy. These reasons include principles of individual liberty and property rights, which encompass the rights of unborn individuals. The notion is that our life is your property, and no one has the right to steal it. Furthermore, Austrian economists assert that abortion disrupts incentives and undermines the essence of voluntary exchange and societal cooperation by tampering with the natural consequences of individual actions.
Given their emphasis on property rights and the consequences of individual actions, it’s not surprising that Austrian economists take a tough stance on crime. President Bukele waged war on El Salvador’s drug gangs and successfully brought down the crime rate by arresting 76,000 villains and locking them up in a specially designed prison, where the guards rule, not the cons.
While Austrians typically reject the industrial military complex as a means of expanding government size and fostering opportunities for patronage, they strongly advocate for the use of force to protect property rights. President Milei is contemplating deploying the armed forces to take on the gangs in his country. Additionally, he has relaxed regulations on the use of firearms by law enforcement officers.
Just like President Trump, who always speaks his mind, Milei recently stirred up an international controversy when he insulted Colombia and Mexico, both of which are effective narco-states. He even warned that Colombia was on the brink of becoming the next Venezuela or Cuba. He referred to Venezuela as a “prison island” full of carnage. Of course, he was correct on all counts, but in this era of enforced globalism, identifying a genuine problem and attempting to solve it is not typically encouraged.
Of course, the mainstream media are labeling Javier Milei as a threat to human rights and attempting to vilify him, just as they did with Bukele for substantially reducing crime, as they did with Trump, and with Bolsonaro, who is now facing potential arrest in Brazil over allegations of using a fake vaccine passport two years ago.
Personally, I find the Milei show nearly as entertaining as the Trump show, observing how the globalists lose their minds over anyone daring to reject their agenda. However, I genuinely fear that Milei may be assassinated.
The post Javier Milei Austrian Economist, Champion of Anti-Globalism appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
mileiaperturasesiones
Casa Rosada (Argentina Presidency of the Nation), CC BY 2.5 AR <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/deed.en>, via Wikimedia Commons
A country’s slide into socialism/communism begins with socialist policies. And every one of these has been proposed in the United States: like an exorbitant minimum wage which is exorbitant and not tied to performance or return on labor, a universal basic income, charging for electricity usage based on income rather than quantity of electricity used, issuing carbon usage credits, allowing the state, not the consumer, to decide how much is enough, imposing a billionaire tax, taxing wealth transfers and inheritance to prevent parents from helping their children, and taxing unrealized capital gains to discourage saving and investing.
Beyond the purely economic, policies that mandate demographic quotas for promotions, hiring, firing, or school acceptance are examples of social engineering that removes the “profit motive,” the reward for hard work, disincentivizing hard work, and resulting in the promotion of those who cannot meet the quality standards.
Washington State has proposed eliminating the bar exam in order to increase diversity among lawyers. Oregon high school students will no longer need to be able to read, write, or do math in order to graduate, for the same reason.
United Airlines announced that it would prioritize diversity in its selection of trainee pilots. And in order to ensure that the younger generation understands only the state agenda, homeschooling will be banned.
Socialism/Communism has never worked, but somehow, people keep voting for it and believing that this time will be different. The truth is that it has caused tens of millions to starve to death while robbing hundreds of millions of their innovation, creativity, and motivation.
The entire society, working different jobs from research scientist to ticket puncher, for an equal number of turnip coupons, is so unnatural that it can only exist in a totalitarian system where people have no choice.
No capitalist nation ever forced people to earn a profit, but communist countries had to use their secret police and state surveillance to force people not to.
No one was ever shot trying to break into East Germany or swimming to Cuba.
Socialism cannot bring prosperity because it destroys the market functions of private property and eliminates the incentives for more productive people to work harder or more inventive people to innovate. Socialists are always worried about wealth inequality, and their solution always involves taking money from the harder-working, more efficient people and giving it to the less productive.
Socialists believe that if they were to forcibly redistribute the wealth, everyone would be better off. The first problem with this logic is that the people who have wealth now would be worse off if someone stole it.
The United States has the highest GDP per capita in the entire American continent, from Canada to Argentina, including the Caribbean. The US average income is about $76,000 per year.
In Haiti, it is $1,748. If the socialists had their way and redistributed the wealth evenly across the roughly 1 billion people in the Americas, the average would be $35,000 per year. So, US citizens would be giving up more than half their income but would still be working the same jobs, for the same number of hours.
If you received the same wage, no matter what, you would stop doing overtime, stop coming up with new ideas, and pretty much stop working at all. In the Soviet Union, there was a joke: “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.”
Almost every communist country began by abolishing money and nationalizing production of everything, including food. Within a very short time, these countries faced famines.
With no profit incentive, there was no motivation for farmers to grow food. Additionally, with no money prices, there was no rational way to calculate the cost of planting versus the money earned from selling the produce or to calculate how many resources should be allocated to producing food versus producing some other product.
Nearly six million people in the USSR starved to death in the Soviet Famine (1931-1934). Roughly half of these were Ukrainians, living in the “breadbasket of Europe.”
During the Khmer Rouge period (1975-1979) in Cambodia, between one half and a third of the population died of starvation and overwork, although nearly 100% of the population was sent out to the fields to farm. Venezuelans are facing hunger, while Cubans are facing shortages of everything.
The winner of the socialist starvation death toll competition is Mao Zedong, whose Great Famine (1958-1962) killed 30 million Chinese.
India was resource-rich and had the largest workforce, but socialist policies led to India becoming synonymous with extreme poverty. The USSR was the most resource-rich country on the planet and had one of the largest workforces, but had an economy about 5% the size of the U.S. China similarly had a huge workforce, and it was not until 2007 that the average Chinese citizen was earning more than the average American was earning in the year 1900.
Vietnam also experienced a mini-famine caused by communism, but they quickly realized that by privatizing farming, they were able to increase rice production.
It was privatization that also ended the Chinese famine, and Deng Xiaoping allowing private sector entrepreneurs to earn profits that lifted 800 million Chinese out of poverty.
No former communist country has ever reverted to communism. And China and Vietnam, the world’s largest remaining communist countries, dramatically increased the welfare of their people by allowing market economics, profit, and private ownership.
But both China and Vietnam remain dramatically poorer than the US because of their refusal to completely let go of communism/socialism.
Given all the evidence against it, how can American socialists believe that this time will be different?
The post Socialist Policies: Steps Toward a System That Has Always Failed appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Red_Guards_Austin
Red Guards Cell, Austin, Texas. By Reddebrek, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=104103414
Vaunce News 
