For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
The Thomas Friedman Bubble
Written By : John Hawkins

Thomas Friedman strikes me as a creepy guy. Keep in mind, we’re talking about man who openly admires China’s lack of democracy because he thinks it would make it easier to get things done. Clearly, Friedman is not the sort of person who can be trusted with power, which is why it’s probably a good thing that he’s firmly ensconced at the slowly dying New York Times instead of actually making policy with the other wonky academics in the White House.

Of course, given the weird bubble Friedman apparently lives in, he couldn’t cut it in politics anyway — which is ironic given that he makes a living writing about the subject. That’ll become more apparent as you read his latest analysis of the nation’s mood,

On Nov. 19, Rasmussen Reports published results from a national telephone poll that showed that 47 percent of America’s likely voters said the nation’s “best days are in the past,” 37 percent said they are in the future. Sixteen percent were undecided. Just before President Obama was inaugurated, 48 percent said our best days were still ahead and 35 percent said they had come and gone. This is a disturbing trend.

What’s driving it? Let me say what’s not driving it. It is not that millions of Americans suddenly started worrying about the national debt. Seriously, do you know anyone who says: “I couldn’t sleep last night. I was tossing and turning until dawn worrying that the national debt was now $14 trillion.” Sorry, that only happens in contrived campaign ads.

I think what is driving people’s pessimism today are two intersecting concerns. The long-term concern is that people intuitively understand that what we need most now is nation-building in America. They understand it by just looking around at our crumbling infrastructure, our sputtering job-creation engines and the latest international education test results that show our peers out-educating us, which means they will eventually out-compete us. Many people understand that we are slipping as a country and what they saw in Barack Obama, or what they projected onto him, was that he had both the vision and capability to pull America together behind a plan for nation-building at home.

But I think they understand something else: that we are facing a really serious moment. We have to get this plan for nation-building right because we are driving without a spare tire or a bumper. The bailouts and stimulus that we have administered to ourselves have left us without much cushion. There may be room, and even necessity, for a little more stimulus. But we have to get this moment right. We don’t get a do-over. If we fail to come together and invest, spend and cut really wisely, we’re heading for a fall — and if America becomes weak, your kids won’t just grow up in a different country, they will grow up in a different world.

Skepticism about how powerful an issue deficit spending may actually turn out to be isn’t exactly novel, but Friedman’s lack of imagination as he considers the topic is breathtaking. Spending has ramped up to astronomical levels in the last two years, we just had a second European nation that had to be bailed out because it couldn’t pay its bills, and we have Tea Partiers all across the country taking to the streets over the debt. Yet, Friedman can’t conceive of anyone really caring about the issue.

#1) That tells you a lot about how Thomas Friedman thinks and apparently, he believes we have infinite money to play with.

#2) It tells you that Friedman is completely and utterly out of touch with average Americans or for that matter, any Americans who might actually be concerned about spending.

Additionally, Friedman’s conclusion that America is hankering for more spending on schools, bridges, and roads is wacky, too — although it’s not exactly a shocker that a liberal would conclude that more spending on liberal interests is just what people want.

But, does America want it? Certainly, Americans care about the quality of schools. They also don’t want a crumbling infrastructure. But, were either of those things campaign issues in 2010? No. Even Obama, Pelosi, and Reid apparently don’t agree with Friedman’s thinking because when they were larding up the stimulus bill with government waste, they didn’t choose to spend most of it on “infrastructure” and education.

Quite frankly, taking a look at the American political scene and coming to the conclusions that Friedman does in this piece take a level of self-delusion that’s the equivalent of a crack addict sitting in a cardboard box in a dirty alley, wearing rags and telling himself that he doesn’t have a problem.

PS: When does Friedman get his next Pulitzer for pumping out this drek?

0
  • Spikey

    Crumbling infrastructure – The cities and states are broke from there own socialist programs and pensions so they have no money to fix the infrastructure.

    Sputtering job-creation engines – To hell with the private sector job creators! Isn’t it the government who decides what companies get to live and die? If a private job creator gets through we should just tax them more.

    International education test – Our public school teachers do anything but teach. They got really bored with teaching; reading, writing and arithmetic, and the kids like free choice time so much more. Tenure and a union the teachers can not be changed.

  • Spikey

    I do not understand why this twit is taken seriously on economic issues, he has zero education in that field.

  • Anonymous

    Let me say what’s not driving it. It is not that millions of Americans suddenly started worrying about the national debt. Seriously, do you know anyone who says: “I couldn’t sleep last night. I was tossing and turning until dawn worrying that the national debt was now $14 trillion.”

    Actually, this is partially true. The deficit as a concern for most Americans (although real and significant) is also a proxy for deeper concerns. The American people seem to be increasingly concluding that we have a political class primarily interested in governing for governing’s sake. They see the commentaries from Mr. Friedman and his friends in the media calling for grand national causes, not because there is a overriding issue that threatens our prosperity and well-being, but because the authors want to use our civilization as a palatte for their grand schemes. They see public infrastructure and educational systems that they throw obscene amounts of money at for little or no practical return. The political class, however, seems to benefit immensely. They hear the political class treating crises as opportunities, not to address the underlying causes of the crisis or to overcome the hardship the crises imposes, but to push their personal agendas.

    • Anonymous

      They are, indirectly. People are plenty worried because they’re going broke paying taxes, paying for illegal immigrants, paying for entitlements, seeing their savings shrink thanks to inflation, and losing their jobs. Or they are on entitlements and are worried because they recognize SS and Medicare are unsustainable because of all the debt we already carry.

      Only the idiots like Friedman think nobody will care if we toss around a few trillion more dollars on schemes that have already failed in the hopes that Obama’s Magic Unicorn Power will somehow make it work this time.

      • Anonymous

        Oh, I do understand that people are worried about the deficit and its consequences as an issue in itself. However, I think the concern about the deficit also serves as a proxy for some very real concerns about the emerging nature of our government. I think the public increasingly perceives the hardships you describe paying for nothing more than the aggrandizement of the broadly defined political class.
        Frankly, the fact that the public is starting to arrive at this conclusion worries me. And it should worry the broad political class, as well. The scenario I’m describing starts to look disturbingly like the delegitimization of the government.

        • Anonymous

          Yeah I was going to add in something about Congress being full of millionaires and government employees making twice what the private sector does while we all go broke.

          We’re a good famine away from the French Revolution. (40% of the domestic corn crop is going into biofuels as food prices climb, btw)

        • Spikey

          it is not a “delegitimization of the government” it is the question of: What should be the role of the federal government?

          I’m for something to the effect of:
          1. Format and provide a form of currency.
          2. Lay down a basic set of laws.
          3. Protect our citizens from foreign invasion.

          • Anonymous

            I agree with your assessment of the legitimate functions of government. My point is that a government can only exceed it’s legitimate functions in a manner that undermines the public interest for so long before the public ceases to consider the government legitimate for any purpose. It’s not clear to me that the public isn’t approaching that point.

          • Spikey

            “government … exceed it’s legitimate functions in a manner that undermines the public interest…”

            I totally agree with that statement.
            Reasoning and only one example of many: If the public interest is an – ours / American interest like “freedom” then what happened in the elections of 2010 would be an example of the people trying to get some of that back in the only way that they are able to – through voting.

            “…public ceases to consider the government legitimate…”

            I don’t think people will come to view our government as not legitimate for (as pointed out in my first answer to your question) we can vote the encroachers out, fairly often, although gerrymandering could cause the government to be viewed as non legitimate. It would take lots of effort on the part of tons everyday citizens to change this and bring it into the spotlight.

            As Milton Friedman said: Regulations “they’re not a threat to the free market. They’re a threat to human freedom.”

            Nice in depth thoughts by the way thanks,
            Spikey

  • Anonymous

    The article is unintentionally hilarious. Two years of Obama and we’re a third-world country in need of “nation building”. Bet Obama appreciates that, Tom! He also contradicts himself in a sentence, first describing the country as a car with no bumper or spare tire (nice GM reference) having used up all our reserves…but we need to keep spending like we have them. What?

    Sorry Tom. Obama and the Democrats had their shot and they blew it in an orgy of waste, corruption, and money printing (otherwise known as liberalism). Europe is dismantling the entitlement society that American liberals have wished for because it doesn’t work. Liberalism is going down like the Titanic with Obama at the helm, and there are no more bailouts coming.

  • Spikey

    Economics, Look no further than to another Friedman, Milton Friedman:

    “Freedom requires individuals to be free to use their own resources in their own way”

    “If you don’t control your property, if somebody else controls it, they’re going to decide what to do with it, and you have no possibility of exercising influence on it”

    “Nobody spends somebody else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else’s resources as carefully as he uses his own”

    On regulations: “They’re not a threat to the free market. They’re a threat to human freedom.”

    Milton Friedman: July 31, 1912 – November 16, 2006 was a economist, statistician, and professor at my Alma mater the University of Chicago, where I got to listen to him lecture. In my view, his single biggest accomplishment was his conversion from Keynesian economics.

    You will be missed, Thanks for all you have given us.
    Spikey

  • Anonymous

    You mean, when they were “larding it up” with tax cuts, since half the stimulus was tax cuts, don’t you?

    Or, are you one of the millions of rightwingers who does not know that?

    • DrEvil

      Yeah, because letting people keep some more of the money they earned is a crime against humanity or something. Spending is out of control while revenues are down slightly. Not a good combination, but once the economy gets going again, in spite of whatever Obama and the Dems do, not because of it then the revenues will increase. Of course, the Dems will use that as an excuse to spend even more money that we don’t have, increasing the deficit and adding to the deficit.

      Have an Evil day

      • Anonymous

        Another Austrian…Thanks, Herbert Hoover. Your ideas worked 75 years ago and should do wonders in this demand side recession.

        PS Oh, and the bit about people “some more of the money they earned” is just Hannity-esque. We should cut the tax rate to zero and everyone will be much better off! Income inequality worked for serfs; it’ll be fantastic for us too.

        • Damn-Skippy

          Fuck you and every other lefticle asswipe who’s all gung-ho for spending other people’s money. Fuck you all with something blunt and rusty.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YWXM6Q6QGELGTT334IQMWB774Q David

          Why is it such a problem that one person makes more than another? By the way Herbert Hoover wasn’t much of a free market supporter.

        • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

          Oh look class warfare from a leftard, what’s next, racism?

      • Anonymous

        Another Austrian…Thanks, Herbert Hoover. Your ideas worked 75 years ago and should do wonders in this demand side recession.

        PS Oh, and the bit about people “some more of the money they earned” is just Hannity-esque. We should cut the tax rate to zero and everyone will be much better off! Income inequality worked for serfs; it’ll be fantastic for us too.

    • Spikey

      Who are you talking to and on what subject?

    • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

      Are you one of those idiot leftwingers who thinks a rebate is a tax cut?

  • Anonymous

    You mean, when they were “larding it up” with tax cuts, since half the stimulus was tax cuts, don’t you?

    Or, are you one of the millions of rightwingers who does not know that?

  • toddster

    Very rarely do I get to read a good article that also contains the word “drek”. Thank you for making my day”

Advertisement
Featured Video

Who Is Brett Kimberlin?

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info

Users Online