In the afternoon and early evening, NPR has a fake news program called “All Things Considered” (we gave this program its proper name here.).
In yesterday’s program, they were talking about the long-sputtering economy. One of NPR’s fake reporters (I’ve forgotten his name and was driving, so couldn’t write it down) said that there are many who think that “the economy should now be taken off life support.” Roughly direct quote. The term “life support” is, though, directly from the feature.
Life support? Really? Freakin’ “Life support?!?”
Holy mackerel! I thought we’d been living for years now in the sun-drenched, green highlands of the “Great Obama Recovery!!!” At least that’s what the media have been yammering for more than six years now!
All this time, the economy’s really been on “life support.”
I’ve long written about all the happy talk about the economy that’s been going on since Obama’s been President. It’s happy talk that would not happen at all if a Republican President were managing the very same economy.
I’ve also pointed out that, despite the ridiculous happy talk, you and I can see through it if we but choose to pay attention.
For example: When was the last time you were sick and spent six years in “recovery” before you were actually recovered, and operating normally? Well, an economy is the very same way. It is absolutely not a good thing for an economy to be “in recovery,” and not “recovered,” for six long years.
The only possible conclusion — from the media’s very own six-years-long happy talk reports — is that the economy has not been “in recovery” at all!
Meaning what? In what condition, exactly, is the economy?
Well, you and I both know that if the economy had fully recovered, we’d never hear the end of it from the media. So the economy has not “recovered.”
Furthermore, there are serious signs of grave economic problems that the media hardly ever mention, that will raise their ugly heads soon enough: (1) the permanently unemployed, and (2) the number of people taking government — taxpayer-funded — handouts. Those numbers are through the roof, and signal grim times ahead.
The Democrats are betting that these particular effects of their policies will detonate long after their policies have long been in effect and are irreversible. I’m speculating that the Dems hope the effects will detonate during a Republican President’s administration(1).
The NPR “reporter” said that our economy was “on life support.” Can an economy on life support also be “in recovery?” Well, I guess it can, but it should also be noted that, by definition, an economy that is both “on life support” and “in recovery” is at the very least subsisting in a pretty grim condition.
There is an actual definition for the term “recession,” and it doesn’t encompass the current economic situation. Recession simply means an economy that is going backward, receding. However, an economy that is in horrible condition, but not going backward, is not in “recession.” Small comfort for those forced to survive in the horrible economy.
There has been growth in certain areas of the economy — high-tech, for example — but those areas are not where the majority of American people have applicable skills. Hence the increasing number of permanently unemployed.
So, here’s the truth, a truth that I’ve never heard mentioned — not even once — in the media: An economy that starts in a great, healthy place, then goes into recession, then recovers from that recession, is worlds better off than an economy that enters recession from a position of weakness, then begins a recovery.
It’s this second condition — a weak economy that entered recession during the second half of the George W. Bush Administration — that we have in place now in America. That economy, Bush’s economy, was headed into recovery through the natural forces of American economics, when Obama took over the Presidency and immediately slammed on the brakes with massive regulation (Obamacare and more).
Obama was unable to stall completely what could have been a great recovery — the American economic machine is an awesome thing to behold if it’s allowed to work — but he was able to divert it sufficiently, to allow for a vast expansion of takers to exist and survive. The number of Food Stamp and other taxpayer largesse recipients is through the roof.
Yet the media continue to tout the great, apparently never-ending “recovery.” A recovery that will immediately transform itself into grim economic times the moment a Republican becomes the President of the United States.
(1) – Here’s some interesting speculation for you conspiracy theorists out there: Anyone in the know understands that the combination of the permanently unemployed, and largely unemployable, along with the population of takers, will bloom into a full-blown crisis sometime very soon…likely in the next Presidential term. Is someone on the left actually trying to torpedo the Hillary Clinton candidacy to allow a Republican President to inherit what would then probably be an unmanageable economic crisis? Democrats know quite well how to manage such “unmanageable” circumstances — how not to “let a serious crisis go to waste:” Use the crisis to build a permanent Democrat voting coalition that would make American democracy meaningless. Republicans would try to solve the crisis, and if the Dems have their way, be unable to, making for the above-mentioned permanent Democrat voting bloc.