With this latest regulatory grab instituting control over compensation decisionmaking at not only government-owned industries but those merely subject to regulation, the administration seeks to impose more and more control over independent business judgment of risk, individually-negotiated compensation agreements, and who knows what next. There is a reason competition works, and it's partly because individuals take calculated risks in the marketplace. When the government steps in to "correct" these risks, the result is not competition. It's a dramatically less efficient marketplace..... Besides, we don't really have enough money to fund a regulator to sit over the shoulder of every bank teller. This is getting ridiculous. See a fuller description latest here.
I am beginning to sound like a one-note fiddle, I know. But I can't pretend that the thought of an economy strangled by debt for the next decades doesn't scare me. I know it sounds pretty to guarantee new fully-funded entitlements, but the President and Democrats in Congress don't seem to realize we haven't yet funded the old ones in any sustainable way. Each new false promise throws more and more debt upon the young and the children of the young, guaranteeing that they will be crippled with debt even as they try to compete in an increasingly crowded global marketplace. Even decades ago, Reagan knew this wasn't possible: crushing taxes will strangle the very innovations and investments we need to make to compete and survive.
And if you don't buy my story, check this guy's-- James Pethokoukis has a great column today that all y'all should read!
In honor of Margaret Thatcher, let's all take a moment and follow her lead to oppose government over-intervention in the economy. And after we've all called our congressional representatives, let's go stare down socialism. You know, for fun.
More and more I get the feeling the President is running for Global Prom King. The trip to Copenhagen was just the latest in his global prom king campaign, which began with the trip to Berlin and hasn't stopped since. The problem with this style of leadership is that while it tastes great, it is less filling. When the people are told every thirty minutes that the President is leading us to a "watershed" "critical" "pivotal" moment... we may begin to expect a pivot. Yet, in so many ways, the promises of the President quickly turn themselves on their head. See, for example, this mordant column: Barack W. Bush.
I have my own issues with the policies of the President. But even those on his side must find it frustrating when they find themselves forced to ask, as Krauthammer does today, "Does anything he says remain operative beyond the fading of the audience applause?"