Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Back to the Future

I caught a few sound bites from a speech given by Hillary Rodham, our once and future Queen, this morning. 'Twas on Bill O'Reilly's radio show, but I'm not getting into what he said about her or her speech. He's him and I'm me.

She mentioned Bill Clinton-Rodham's "bridge to the twenty-first century, in which, if you'll recall, he alluded to a number of things he intended to do to effect "change." 'Twas a good thing that he never actually said "change for the better," because those few things he actually did rendered us all a little poorer and under a few more government restriction than we previously had been.

Hillary's reference today (though she mentioned no specifics as to what had been done) was used as a contrast to George Bush's "tunnelling back toward the nineteenth century," in her words.

It was kind of cute.

Thing is, "tunnelling back to the nineteenth century," in some respects, would be a really good idea! No taxes. No regulations on small businesses. No "War on Drugs." No drug problem! No foreign wars! No predatory lawyers. No id cards or licenses.

Inventions were flying out of people's home workshops at a rate never before seen! Bicycles, automobiles, sewing machines, clothes washers, hand tools, then power tools. It was a time that can only be likened to the electronic revolution in the 80's and 90's just past (our recent electronic revolution only happened because uneducated politicians hadn't figured out how to regulate it yet).

I'm leaving out the bad things from the 19th century, mostly because we've been moving in the right direction in most instances. Where we haven't, it's been government that's been the problem. Jim Crow laws, followed by "Affirmative Action," coupled with deliberately lowered expectations have exacerbated the racial problems--not ordinary people.

Government intervention is making medical care more difficult, complex and expensive each year. A person could croak while they figure out your copay!

When anyone decided to build a motorcar near the turn of the century, they just did it. They could borrow money, sell stock, offer unusual considerations or even ask for charity to get the company off the ground. People invested. Sometimes they lost their money; sometimes they hit it big. That's Capitalism. Government had no role. As it should be.

When Preston Tucker decided he had a better idea in the mid 1940's, he had the Securities & Exchange to contend with. He had General Motors, who had many politicians in its pocket, to contend with. In spite of the fact that it was a pretty good car, with many excellent innovations, and which could've become a great car with very little tweeking. Government, using the unConstitutional SEC, shut Tucker down on stock sales technicalities.

So much for innovation in the face of established corporations.


Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California


Ol' BC said...

Wow Colonel, that was outstanding.
Especially the part about no taxes, new inventions, etc. Ms. Clinton's socialism will only set us back more. She is really trying to portray herself as a moderate though. However, I remember her failed effort at socialized medicine.

Col. Hogan said...

BC, If she becomes President,she WILL try again on the socialized medicine. And, guess what she'll do with the Patriot Act.