m

Monday, March 30, 2009

Fox Nation: Needed Change in Media or a Compromise in Objectivity?


Today Fox News announced its long awaited and new "TheFoxNation.com." With a great deal of fanfare the network has had a huge advertising campaign and has all of its network personalities referring to it at every opportunity.


On the surface, TheFoxNation.com looks like many other websites. I do like how it fuses Fox News with its Fox Business site and there is no question that such will help to bolster the visibility of the latter. Also, I love how it has articles from various news sources, rather than just content produced by Fox directly. (However, some of the affiliated media is from companies owned or closely linked to Fox parent company, News Corp, such as the New York Post). Visually this news portal is very easy to read, navigate, and to find content. Furthermore it is exhaustive in its reach covering virtually every area of news, business and lifestyle.


However, TheFoxNation.com is designed to be more than just another TV network website. According to its purpose statement, much more. The site states that the "Fox Nation was created for people who believe in the United States of America and its ideals, as expressed in the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Emancipation Proclamation.
It is a community that believes in the American Dream: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. One that believes being an American is an honor, as well as a great responsibility—and a wonderful adventure." It always amazes me that the most pro-American major news network is owned by a person born in another country (Rupert Murdoch is from Australia). This statement goes beyond the typical scope of a news network.


The site goes on to say that "this is a place for people who believe we live in a great country, a welcoming refuge for legal immigrants who want to contribute their talent and abilities to make our way of life even greater. We believe we should enjoy the company and support of each other, delighting in the creativity, ingenuity, and work ethic of one and all, while observing the basic rules of civility and mutual respect and, most importantly, strengthening our diverse society by striving for unity." This sounds more like a conservative social networking site, than the content of a news media. This is the kind of statement that will attract criticism from those in the mainstream media. We are told that "taking sides" may be patriotic, but it may compromise objectivity.


Finally the site states that "the Fox Nation is for those committed to the core principles of tolerance, open debate, civil discourse--and fair and balanced coverage of the news. It is for those opposed to intolerance, excessive government control of our lives, and attempts to monopolize opinion or suppress freedom of thought, expression, and worship. We invite all Americans who share these values to join us here at Fox Nation." Again, not what you expect to find from a media website. But, then again, maybe it should be.


Currently the mainstream media behaves as though it hates this country. It seems far more fond of models being promoted by Europe and other parts of the world than that of the US. Many traditional media sites claim objectivity, while plowing us over with agendas and hostility towards the values that have made this nation the most prosperous and free in the history of the world. A great example was the recent election for President in which the media didn't merely witness history, but created it.


I have been involved in journalism since the 80s, working with both publications and as a radio personality, so this approach to broadcast journalism even makes me a little uncomfortable. However, Fox Nation is being refreshingly honest. That network is made up of people that make a living conveying news and information. They want to continue to do that without government interference. Fox is a business, not just a news sources, and it wants to be able to stay profitable and not be crushed by a government out of control. Fox is made up of individuals who have families and they want to make sure that their spouses and children live in a country that is continually improving. The bottom line is that Fox Nation recognizes, above all things, they are Americans first and journalists second. That may be the perfect role of media in a time such as this.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am), AOL Radio, and CBS Radio. Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, March 29, 2009

"Morning in America" Replaced by "Nightmare on Main Street"

In 1980 and through out his two terms in office, the theme of the Reagan Administration was "Morning in America" and it could not be more accurate. I think back to the late 1970s when I was a teenager growing up under Jimmy Carter. In the late 1970s more countries had fallen to Communism than at any time since immediately after World War II. So called “unaligned” countries, particularly in Africa and South America fell under the grips of Communism. On the economic front, Americans were facing multiple demons: double digit inflation, double digit unemployment, and double digit interest rates. When Communist tyrants invaded Afghanistan, the US response was to not play games with the Soviets in the Olympics, a choice that punished our athletes and the untold number of Americans who would love to see them compete. Carter would try to make us feel better about our plight by doing fireside chats wearing a sweater (his subtle way of reminding us there was an energy crisis as well) and spending his time blaming Americans for our various problems. The crisis, we were told, was “a malaise” that had become rampant among the American people. Americans had become depressed and needed to believe in themselves again in order to be great again.

Ronald Reagan brought significant change to the American landscape. On the domestic front, Americans had been plagued by a welfare state that expanded under the Johnson Administration a couple of decades before. Those who did not want to work, did not have to. Government was entitled to as much of the public's money as it deemed necessary. Paying excessive taxes was considered "patriotic" and complaining about them was un-American. Democrats at this time enjoyed the jovial position of being the Santa Claus of the Welfare State and Republicans were relegated to being the scrooges financing government programs. It was no surprise that the Republican Party had been the minority party since 1932.

Ronald Reagan said to work was noble and to not work was a disgrace if one was able. Ronald Reagan declared that the government was taking the people's money and that is was the Congress, not the American people, that needed to be held accountable. His massive tax cuts in 1981 led to the longest period of prosperity since the booming 1920s. More importantly, Reagan changed the way people thought about government and became to believe that monies kept in the hands of the public was always better than money in the hands of government. In no time Republicans became the party of defenders of the taxpayer and Democrats became seen as thieves for those unwilling to work for themselves. In 1980 more than 30% described themselves as “card carrying Democrats.” By the end of the Reagan Administration, this number was down to single digits. Reagan changed America’s political demographics more than any person with the exception of Franklin Roosevelt or Abraham Lincoln.

Today, "Morning in America" almost seems like ancient history. Instead we are facing a "Nightmare on Main Street." Barack Obama is socializing medicine, destroying the energy industry, spreading a cancer through out the banking industry, destroying incentives for those who work, and is increasing entitlements for those who will not work. He is raising taxes on those who make $250,000 a year and more, as well as on those who drive cars, smoke cigarettes, use health care, have a job, or use money (thanks to his inflationary policies).

The Obama Administration promises to create a situation very similar to the one that catapulted Reagan into the White House. Even today, friends of liberty are wondering who could help fill the void. The challenge for us is to end the nightmare and usher a new era of prosperity and freedom that we have not seen in years. The time to begin that process is now.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am), AOL Radio, and CBS Radio. Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, March 28, 2009

European Leaders Begin to Size up Obama

It seems like it has been years since Obama gave his speech in France in front of thousands of raving fans. People came in mass to stand at the feet of "the Messiah" who pointed towards a new era in international relations. Obama's polling numbers were off the chart through out Europe and leaders on the other side of the Atlantic were anxious to enter a new era with a new US leader.

We are now just a couple of months into the Obama Administration and reviews are beginning to come in from those same leaders who were very recently singing his praises.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy believes that Obama's approach of focusing on bailouts is fundamentally flawed and short sighted, declaring, "the problem is not about spending more, but putting in place a system of regulation so that the economic and financial catastrophe that the world is seeing does not reproduce itself."

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that "the prime minister of the Czech Republic slammed President Barack Obama's plan to spend nearly $2 trillion to push the U.S. economy out of recession as 'the road to hell' that European Union governments must avoid." Furthermore, "all of these steps, these combinations and permanency is the road to hell," Mr. Topolanek said. "We need to read the history books and the lessons of history and the biggest success of the [EU] is the refusal to go this way. Americans will need liquidity to finance all their measures and they will balance this with the sale of their bonds but this will undermine the liquidity of the global financial market," Mirek Topolanek said.

The Telegraph, a British newspaper recently had the headline, "Can Obama win Us Back?" It is sub titled "President Obama is losing friends - and the G20 will be a further test." The newspaper was referring to the lack of preparation the US put into its embassy positions. Clearly, for the US, international relations was on the back burner in the minds of British leaders.

Not all of the criticism is towards Obama directly, but the disagreement in approach is still obvious. Sweden was been facing a problem with its automobile industry that is very similar to what the US has faced, yet had a very different response to its problems. The New York Times reported that the "enterprise minister, Maud Olofsson, put it recently, 'The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories.'" Saab lost over $340 million last year and has begun the process of "reorganization," which is one step short of bankruptcy.

Headlines through out Europe are generally taking a more negative, or at least, cautious tone and are increasingly doubtful about Obama's ability to move the US in the right direction. What is interesting about the criticism is that it is coming from countries that have been noted for being socialist for decades, but are now concerned that the US is taking an approach that is to the left of them. These are strange days indeed.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 26, 2009

It is a "Restoration" and not "Conservative" Movement

For years I have felt that the term "conservative" was inadequate in describing the objectives of those who support the cause of liberty. The word implies being resistant to change. In fact, Obama and the mainstream media effectively promoted the idea that to be conservative was to want to defend the status quo. Obama's campaign was one of "change" and the media lumped everyone who opposed him as conservatives who wanted to keep things the way they were. This could not be further from the truth.

The term "conservative" doesn't fit those who support freedom today. We do not want to conserve a massive national debt, political elitism, or a deterioration of American families. We are interested in restoring those principles that made American the greatest nation on the face of the earth. Those principles include:
  • The belief in rule of law. Our political system was designed to protect its people from radical change. It was fearful of unchecked mob rule as much as it was an oligarchy and is intended to protect the minority from the majority. Furthermore, it is one of the most difficult constitutions in the world for facilitating change for a purpose. The founders believed that most solutions were found outside of the government and they made a document that promoted such an objective.

  • A commitment to limited government. This nation was founded on the notion of the dispersion of power. The states were significantly more powerful than the federal government and the US Senate (which had its entire membership chosen by governors and state legislatures until the 20th century) was designed for the purpose of protecting those states from the national government. They were originally chosen by state governments as a protector of state rights. The US Constitution provides around 18 powers for the US Congress according to Article I, Section 8. According to the 10th Amendment, everything else was to be left to the states and the citizens.

  • The importance of national security. When our nation was founded the world was much larger. With nuclear missiles only minutes away, we cannot merely be "fortress America," but we also cannot be the world's police force. However, national defense isn't just soldiers and missiles, but national sovereignty is reflected in secure borders.

  • A strong belief in private property. Today, both parties see the building of a shopping mall as a case for "imminent domain" and they regulate people out of their homes in the name of wetlands and endangered species. Our nation was founded on the fundamental importance of the right to property. Furthermore, our political system is opposed to the idea of redistribution of wealth. One of the greatest speeches delivered by any member of Congress was by Davy Crockett, who warned his colleagues about appropriating money for a person in a manner that was not constitutional (the widow of an Admiral). He offered his own salary for a week to help her if his colleagues would join him, and if they did, the sum to be given would be higher that the appropriation. That bill to provide aid was destined to be approved until Crockett took them to task. They voted against the bill, but also kept their week's pay. Crockett got back on the House floor after the vote and noted "You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men - men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

  • A belief in free enterprise. Government limited its role in the economy to that of a referee and was not to be intrusive. This is seen in it being responsible for such things as "standard weights and measures" and its explicit prohibition in taxing individuals directly (or income tax, which was later changed to all of our demise). Today the government uses taxation, regulation, and licensure laws to keep free enterprise in check, when it should do everything in its power to unleash it. Chief Justice John Marshall noted that the "power to tax is the power to destroy." In recent years, that seems to become the primary mission of government.

Obviously these points only scratch the surface. The point is, those who support the restoration of America's values should use that term and recognize that words like "conservative" fall on deaf ears for good reasons. No one wants to conserve the status quo.

The above image links to an audio of the writer discussing the US Constitution on the Price of Business Show.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Sweden, US, and Answering the Socialism Question

The economic lessons the vast majority of us received in high school and college is grossly inadequate. Most people can't answer the simple question as to whether the US is making a dramatic move towards socialism. In fact, most can't even explain what socialism is. Socialism is simply defined as "government control or ownership of the means of production." What are the means of production? You and I are, of course, as are the businesses we own and work for.

Recently and with questionable Constitutional authority, the Congress has financed (largely through fiat money) the massive taking over of numerous financial institutions. So ambitious is the government's reach, Congressional leaders are "naming names" of individuals who received bonuses from companies that garnered a bailout to an angry mob and retroactively taxing these executives in an effort to punish the businesses they claimed a commitment to protect.


Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner and company are not finished yet. The Associated Press are reporting that he and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke "sought broad new powers Tuesday to regulate tottering nonbank financial companies like insurance giant AIG, and President Barack Obama said he hopes 'it doesn't take too long to convince Congress' to grant them.'" These powers don't merely transfer to the Fed and to Treasury, but to the President himself. Furthermore "Along with the new authority to regulate and, if necessary, take over giant financial companies whose collapse might endanger the broader economy, the administration wants increased oversight and controls of previously unregulated markets such as hedge and private equity funds." The government's reach will even go into financial institutions that didn't participate in the bailout programs.


I remember when Americans were shocked back in 1979 when Chrysler successfully negotiated a bailout from the federal government that was a fraction of what GM received in January, which was a very small fraction of what the government gave in bailouts in general.


Historically, when we typically think of socialism, we think of Europe. Furthermore, the most socialistic of all the European governments is arguably Sweden, which is famous for its "cradle to grave" government programs. But recently George Bush, without Congressional approval, gave $15 billion to help bailout the Automobile industry. Sweden's government had a very different message to its struggling and iconic Saab motor company. The New York Times reported that the "enterprise minister, Maud Olofsson, put it recently, 'The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories.'" Saab lost over $340 million last year and has begun the process of "reorganization," which is one step short of bankruptcy.


Ironically, the Washington Times has noted that "Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Monday that the administration decided on its public-private plan to rescue the U.S. financial system because "we are not Sweden," the country known for nationalizing troubled banks and other sectors of its economy. We are the United States of America, we are not Sweden," Mr. Geithner said.


Geithner is right, Sweden had enough sense and, maybe a commitment to free market principles, to avoid socializing the automobile industry. One thing we know for sure is that there is no question the US is making a dramatic move towards becoming socialistic and seems to be trying to surpass, rather than merely catch up, with Europe's poster child of socialism.


Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Lessons Wall Street Could Learn from Hillsdale College

Education should be an on going process. If a person becomes too old to learn, they are simply too old. Wall Street institutions that lined up for hand outs should have went back to college before they became wards of the federal government. They should have went to Hillsdale College.

Hillsdale College is a private institution in Michigan that is noted for its commitment to independent thinking, its love of country and for producing outstanding alumni. It also doesn't receive a single penny from either the federal or state governments. Not even financial aid from its students. It argues that this has been the secret of its independence.

In fact, the financial geniuses on Wall Street didn't even have to go back to school, they could have simply visited Hillsdale's website, which states that "In 1975, the federal government said that Hillsdale had to sign a form stating that we did not discriminate on the basis of sex. Hillsdale College had never discriminated on any basis, and had never accepted federal taxpayer subsidies of any sort, so the College felt no obligation to comply, fearing that doing so would open the door to additional federal mandates and control. Our trustees pledged two things: first, that the College would continue its long-standing policy of non-discrimination, and second, that it would not accept any encroachments on its independence. The case went to court, and Hillsdale College won a partial victory, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals did rule that Hillsdale College was an “indirect recipient” of federal funding because of participation in federal grant and loan programs. In 1984, Grove City College in Pennsylvania fought and lost a similar legal battle. The case then went to the Supreme Court, and in Grove City v. Bell, it was determined that if even one student received a federal grant or loan, it made that institution a direct recipient of federal funds. To avoid the hassles of government control, Hillsdale College announced its decision to end participation in all federal financial aid programs in 1985. In 2007, Hillsdale announced that it would no longer accept State of Michigan taxpayer subsidies earmarked for student financial aid, thereby making the College completely independent of taxpayer support" (emphasis added).

Rarely in history has the government funded any business or institution without ultimately controlling it. It is naive to think that a government that exercises so much control over businesses in the form of taxation, regulations and licensure laws without funding them would not expect more -- much more -- from companies they actually financed. Now they have dined at the government's table, businesses will be looking at spending millions in legal costs to extract itself from the monster it has wed (if that is even possible). The first legal battle will come quickly, with the government retroactively taxing AIG for bonuses it paid its employees.

The admonishment to "do your homework" isn't limited to businesses. All of us need to take a much more careful approach in dealing with this government today.
Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, March 19, 2009

The US uses Zimbabwe as an Economic Model

Americans are being bombarded on numerous fronts -- AIG executives getting outrageous bonuses with taxpayer dollars, the government is bolstering illegal immigrants, Obama is placing pressures on states to restore the welfare state, etc., etc., etc. However, the biggest issue of concern to all Americans may be happening and getting a complete pass by the mainstream media. That is the paying for massive new government programs through the mass production of worthless money. Money, according to the New York Times, "printed out of thin air."

The United States government is using inflation, which is the most harsh form of taxation of all, to pay for its out of control spending. Inflation isn't merely "high prices," although that is a symptom of such a policy. Instead, inflation is "too much money chasing too few goods" and in this case for the purpose of paying for government. If the number of dollars go up, the value of that currency goes down. This results in higher prices, a decline in investment, and economic instability.

All of us are familiar with the history classes where we have seen Germany's inflation that resulted in a wheel barrell of money being required to pay for a loaf of bread. This inflation created such economic havoc that it created the perfect environment for Adolph Hitler to rise to power. It became so bad that it was easier and cheaper to use money as wallpaper than to go to the store and buy such.

In addition to destroying the value of our money, inflation is a horrible form of taxation. When our prices begin to go through the roof, our largely uneducated public will often blame business over government for the terrible changes we will witness. Inflation is the government's cowardly way to pay for its irresponsible programs.

Very few legitimate countries use inflation as a means to fund their governments. That policy is typically relegated to places like Iran (17 percent), Burma (35 percent), and Zimbabwe (231,000,000 percent). The last country's situation is such a disaster, it has 85 percent unemployment and the people are grateful it is only that high, with a worthless currency fueling that job market.

Just this week the United States took a chapter out of Zimbabwe's playbook by pumping $1.2 trillion into the money supply in an attempt to pay off its bills. Many Americans have (rightly) been alarmed by the more than $1.5 trillion we have seen in bailouts. According to the Washington Post, these inflationary efforts have the potential of being much more far reaching, noting that "combined with the billions already deployed by the Fed, the new money dwarfs even the biggest government bailouts of financial companies."
When the currency is ravaged by an inflationary money supply, the first place to turn to is to precious medals. Jay Hancock of the Baltimore Sun noted that "yesterday the Fed announced it would inject more than $1 trillion in the economy by buying longer-term Treasuries and mortgages. As Yves Smith notes, even the $300 billion the Fed pledged for Treasuries may not have much effect, given the huge supply of bonds the government needs to sell to finance the ballooning deficit. Gold is soaring, presumably on the expectation that the Fed's move will undermine the dollar and stoke long-term inflation. It's up $60 this morning. Has there ever been a bigger intraday or daily increase?" Precious medals should only go higher.

History has shown that "pumping money" into an economy to pay for government programs has always resulted in massive damage to a country. It is typically the last resort of third world governments on the brink of economic ruin. We have entered a very dangerous stage in our nation's history.


Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Obama takes from Vets to Expand Welfare Rolls

If it were any other President at any other time, I would be shocked. For Barack Obama, the latest announcement is nothing more than business as usual. Recently, members of the Obama administration (including the President) met with members of several veteran organizations, including the largest of such groups -- The American Legion. Leaders of that organization are up in arms because of what they heard and it is for good reason.

In a press release from the organization, we learn that the leader of the Legion (Commander David K. Rehbein) is "deeply disappointed and concerned” after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases. " The release goes on to point out that Obama "is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it."

Finally, the Legion points out that "This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ‘… to care for him who shall have borne the battle…’ given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm’s way, and not private insurance companies." To saddle private insurance companies with this cost could lead to discrimination towards those who served in the military when they consider covering vets. Furthermore, since policy have financial limits, this policy could take away coverage for other family members who might need it. On a broader note, many fear this type of policy is part of Obama's larger objective to burden private insurance companies with higher costs in order to weaken them as part of the Administration's on going objective to make a case for socialized medicine. Insurance companies will be forced to raise premiums in order to pay for this additional liability. Obama will point to this situation as an indicator of inefficiencies among insurance companies.

The irony is that, while Obama is trying to increase the burden of those fighting men and women who have protected our country, this Administration is also pressuring governors to increase the welfare rolls by allowing people who are not even seeking employment to receive benefits. For example, Gov. Haley Barbour noted, that if his state of Mississippi wanted to receive $54 million in increased unemployment benefits from the Obama "stimulus" package, they will have to expand the benefits to include those not actively looking for employment or even willing to take a job if offered. If Barbour didn't take it, he will receive only 4 billion of the expanded benefits. It is clear why governors would be resistant to such a bizarre policy approach. Obama is single handily restoring the welfare policies that wereso pervasive before 1996, when a bipartisan approach was used to reform a system of economic dependency.

Obama wants to harm our veterans and benefit those who will not work. What a strange world we live in today.


Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, March 16, 2009

Is There an Upside to Obama?

Friends of liberty everywhere are up in arms over the dangerous rise of Barack Obama. People are storing up guns, discussing relocation to other countries, and are even stashing away cash in anticipation that things will likely get worse instead of better under this Administration. In fact, I'm one of many who believe that Obama wants things to get worst so that he can promote an ever expanding role for government.

With all the alarm, is there an upside to Barack Obama as President? I think so and here are a few examples:
  • Barack Obama is one of the most polarising politicians in US history. For the first time in decades, the political camps have been very well defined. This creates clarity that I believe is long over due.

  • Because we have Obama and his Democratic colleagues in Congress, it will be very easy for the American people to determine who is responsible for the direction we are going. Obama owns this economy and the direction the nation is going as a whole.

  • I, for one, am delighted to not have faux Conservative in the White House. I have long stop defending Bush, but the media continually described Bush as someone who represents the Right. His insane and at times unAmerican policies were often projected as "Conservative," which could not be further from the case. Let the Democrats defend Obama for while!

  • This situation is forcing politicians to define who they are and what they believe in like we haven't seen in years. This was painful for many, an epiphany for others. We need many to have life changing experiences and we need more to be accountable.

  • This is forcing true believers in liberty to stop being co-dependents to liberal Republicans who have destroyed our reputation, if not our integrity. It appears we are not taking it any more. It is about time.

In spite of all this "up side," those who support free enterprise, limited government, and pro-family values have plenty to make them concerned. Surviving Barack Obama and over coming the obvious addiction the general population has of government will be no small task. But instead of being at the end of America's greatness, our best days may be yet to come. In 1979 I was getting involved in politics as a teenager at a time that seemed to me was our darkets hour. Our international reputation was laughable, inflation and unemployment were at double digits, and another country seemed to be falling under Communist influence every few months. At the time it seemed like the sun was falling on a great nation. In reaitly, it was a dawn of a new era. Our best days could still be ahead of us. That choice is ours.


Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Rush Limbaugh and "I Hope Obama Fails"

Obama is under scrutiny like many on the Right never imagined and it is beginning to show in the President's declining poll numbers. Some in the mainstream media are beginning to have buyers remorse, even as the news continues to operate as a propaganda machine to defend itself as ones who moved from the role of "witnesses of history" to makers of it. If Obama fails, the media fails with him they fear. They served as a sophisticated PR tool to get the Illinois Senator in the White House.

Conservatives are up in arms in a way that I have never seen. Even at the height of the Clinton impeachment trials Conservatives were not as vocal. Barack Obama has created an alarm among every day Americans for many good reasons. Obama hates free enterprise, limited government, and those other elements that have made us free. Furthermore, he is developing a shadow government within his White House designed to keep him free from Congressional accountability.

So serious is this Administration's radical actions, even one of his strongest allies, Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) has warned about the establishment of "White House Czars." His policies are radical -- socializing health care, eliminating what little local control is left in education, and the government's far reaching control of energy. These policies may pale in comparison to what Obama plans on doing with the political process. From his hostility towards criticism seen in the removal of reporters from his plane that represented newspapers which endorsed his opponent to his lust for political power by moving the Census (which is used to determine Congressional Districts among other things) to the White House all point to a man who is more interested in the "Cubaization" of the United States and not the mere "Europization" that so many talk about it.

Enter Rush Limbaugh, the long time voice of grassroot conservatives regardless of who was in power. In light of the dangerous times being brought on by the Obama Administration, Limbaugh and other Conservatives feel forced to take off the gloves. Recently, a major publication asked Rush Limbaugh (as well as many other political and media leaders) the media giant's hopes with the dawn of a new Administration. Following a summary of the radical and socialist policies being pursued by the new president, Limbaugh simply said four words, "I hope Obama fails." This is a statement that will not go away and Limbaugh is also not shying away from it either.

A recent Newsweek Magazine has a picture of Limbaugh with (what appears to be) tape over his mouth and the title "Why Rush is Wrong" and it is the reflections of a Conservative journalist who is trying to take the radio host to task. It is interesting that the only Conservative they could find to take Rush on is David Frum, a man described as a "Canadian conservative" who is most identified with the neoconservative wing and has served as a speechwriter to President Bush. His strongest links to the Conservative movement are with the National Review, he is an ardent critic of Sarah Palin, and a huge fan of Michael Steele. In other words, he represents that wing of the "Conservative movement" that most people on the right have largely disregarded. Newsweek, in its desperate efforts to try to create division in the Conservative movement when it comes to Obama, had to go outside of the country and really, outside of the movement, to find a critic. It shows you how pathetic the mainstream media has become.

Could Limbaugh have handled his criticism of Obama better? I think so and with greater effectiveness as well. As an Obama critic who has studied history and economics for years, I know Obama well fail. That is fact, not speculation. It has nothing to do with "hope," but mere reality. Socialism has failed, government isn't the answer, freedom is all that works. Limbaugh should have spoke of Obama's failure as fact, not hope. So if I had been asked to make a statement of what I would "hope" with the inauguration of this new Administration, I would have to say four words like Limbaugh too: I hope America survives.


Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Saturday, March 14, 2009

That Sucking Sound: The Disappearing Newspaper

A few decades ago, most major cities had at least two major newspapers and many of them had morning and evening delivery. Today, newspapers are undergoing rapid decline and, for most of them, their futures are either digital or they will have no future at all. Those newspapers that will survive, will be free. Newspapers with a community focus that discusses the local boy or girl who has graduated from school or served the country with honor in the military and ones with a lifestyle or classified focus (jobs, homes, etc.) that are free will continue to continue to survive and maybe even thrive. The paid ones will quickly become history.

In the last few months we have seen the Rocky Mountain News fold in Denver, Colorado, the curtailing of days of delivery for the Detroit Free Press, and the move from a daily Christian Science Monitor to a weekly edition. This decline of newspapers is attributed to several factors:

The Internet has made the majority of content free. One of the strange answers by the industry, to the newspaper crises, is to raise the price on newspapers. This has only chased customers away to the vast array of sources available at not cost to the reader. The only newspapers that charge and may survive will have to fulfill a very specific function. The jury is out on that.


Information spreads best in a viral way, which lends very well to the Internet, but not newspapers. For years I use to clip articles, some times make copies to send to others, but usually lost them and tried to remember what the article I loved so much actually said. With the Internet, people can easily spread the word about the great article they have seen, pass it via email, and make the source a household name. With the Internet, organizing information is a breeze and it stands as far superior to the old methodology.


Archiving for future reference is very easy. I wanted to find out if the Internet is better than newspapers, so I did a Google search and I received millions of links. Remember going to the library, looking through periodical indices, and thumbing through countless newspapers or magazines to find an article? The Internet has changed all of that.

Many want to attribute the decline to the ideology that is pervasive among newspapers today. The liberal bias in newspapers is obvious and I think it is clear that this has hurt the credibility of the media in general. On TV, Fox News (which is described by the left as conservative, but in my opinion, strives for some level of objectivity) has more viewers than MSNBC and CNN combined. I believe this is attributable to the liberal bent among Fox News competitors.

In spite of these realities, if paid newspapers had Glenn Beck types as their publishers, they would still be in decline because that form of print news would still be in decline. The Internet (and the rise of smart phones that brings Web information everywhere) is just a far superior technology. Conservatives need to stop merely complaining about the newspapers and their liberal bias and take advantage of the new battlefield which is online. Currently, the left is dominating the blogosphere. It is still relatively early in the game, but conservatives need to shelve their pass loses and focus on the future that is the Internet.


This article originally appeared at CNN650.com, part of the CBS Radio Network.


Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 12, 2009

The Rising Star of Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck is nothing short of a media phenomenon. In his own words, a mere five years ago, he was just a DJ on the radio. Today he has the third highest rated show on cable news (this, after being on the Fox News network for only a month), a rapidly expanding radio audience, a very popular magazine, and an excellent career as a successful author. So how did Beck go from "no one" (as he likes to describe himself ) to one of the hottest properties in media today? The following are just a few of the reasons:


  • Beck knows his limitations. He has no problem making fun of himself, reminding people of his humble roots (including a long time sufferer of alcohol addiction), and simply telling guests that he "doesn't understand." When he says that, he's sincere. He wants to assume the person on the program who is trying to destroy jobs through excessive taxation on capital formation or whatever terrible policy, is doing it with the best of intentions. "Help me understand what you are doing?" This is disarming and I think he asks questions in the same way many other Americans would if they had the opportunity to visit with these decision makers.

  • Beck is about philosophy and not party. Beck could care less about party affiliation. Many radio hosts lost credibility in the last election cycle by making it a war between McCain and Obama. The real battle is between socialistic worldviews and those who support freedom. To support McCain was to support different forms of socialism, not economic freedom. Sure, Beck reluctantly supported McCain as the lessor of two evils, but never became a cheerleader, which was a common practice of many radio hosts.

  • Beck doesn't take himself too seriously, but he does take his issues seriously. New viewers of Beck might disagree, in light of the very serious tone he has taken since Obama's inauguration, but the host is also a noted comedian in his own right and uses humor as a powerful tool to get his message out. Even today with his sober tone, he may take the issues seriously, but he doesn't over play his own importance.

  • Beck does his homework. He doesn't merely depend upon others to be informed and he provides original perspectives. He is actually a "thinking" radio host and not a mere talker. Unlike many pundits who have good "gut instincts," Beck is different. Many of the major names in talk radio tend to be more "feelers" about major issues than thinkers. This is seen in their often inconsistent take on policy issues and their lack of understanding of the Constitution. These are not the kind of issues facing Beck.

There is no doubt that Beck is articulate and charismatic, but those are not the main reasons for Beck's success. It is his thoughtfulness and convictions that makes him a rising star.


Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

It is the "Cubaization" and not the "Europization" that We Should Fear

Conservative pundits have rightly pointed out that President Barack Obama is moving rapidly towards socializing the US economy. In making this case, we are told that Obama is working towards the "Europization" of the United States. Obama simply smiles at such comments and you can almost hear him say "thank you."
Most Americans have heard and seen decades of propaganda from the mainstream media about the "virtues" of socialism in Europe. We are told about how wonderful it is to have "free" (if not rationed) health care, the beauty of 30 hour work weeks, and the splendor of employers being unable to fire employees when they deem it necessary. Furthermore, many Americans have gone to beautiful cities like Paris, London, and Rome and think these are great places. Such places are often wonderful to visit, but not to live in. What we haven't been told, or seen in our visits, are the chronic economic problems such policies foster. The Europeans would find our current unemployment rather low and would call this economy that we deem weak, rather strong. If we get down to it, very few Americans would want a European style for the United States. Neither does Barack Obama.

While Obama bombards us with the socialization of our health care, education system, and energy industry, he is quietly creating a political infrastructure designed to keep him and his friends in power for years to come. We are so busy looking at the policy decisions, we are missing the potentially dramatic changes in the US political system.

Obama, quietly, moved the Census Bureau tasks to the White House from the Commerce Department, in what could be a ploy to distort Congressional Districts in favor of his Democratic colleagues. Historically, this important function of government was left in Commerce because that department faces Congressional accountability. Conservatives are not the only ones to fear this, liberal Senator Robert Byrd described Obama's movement of Cabinet functions to the White House by saying that "'too often, I have seen these lines of authority and responsibility become tangled and blurred, sometimes purposely, to shield information and to obscure the decision-making process." This isn't limited to the Census, but also energy, health care, education, and other major policy initiatives.
Obama's "stimulus" package is designed to ensure his long term power. Obama cut his teeth as a political activist and used the radical ACORN organization in his rise to power. That organization, which used political pressure as a powerful force behind the issuing of mortgages to people who could not afford them, will receive over $4 billion from Obama's so-called stimulus package for "educational purposes." This is not the only radical group to be able to eat at Obama's trough, it is just one of the most notable. It is safe to say that the majority of those dollars will go to help candidates and organizations that support Obama's policies. The bulk of the Obama package is not economic stimulus, but political payoffs designed to keep the pockets of his supporters lined and the Democrats in office for years to come.

Instead of being alarmed by our current economic crisis, Obama is delighted. In fact, I believe he needs more bad news to pursue his agenda. Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel reflected the sentiment of the Obama Administration when he said "Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before." Obama is bombarding Congress and the American people with so many different policy and political changes, we can't even begin to keep up with them. That is by design and not by accident. Very few of the things Obama is pursuing would survive the due diligence process one issue at a time. So like rats trying to evacuate a room all at once, they are all scrambling for the door with the knowledge that some of them will get through.

In Emanuel's logic, this crisis is not nearly as bad as it needs to be. Instead of being alarmed by a stock market that has tanked to levels we haven't seen in over a decade and rising unemployment numbers, Obama continues to talk down the economy in a relentless effort to make this situation look as bas as possible so he can pursue his radical agenda.
Be it increased tax creation on the income groups that create jobs, additional financial burdens for companies that try to offer employees health benefits, or the undermining of our political institutions that help keep us free; all of these items are part of a larger agenda towards making the US look more like Cuba or Venezuela and not like Europe. The Europization of the US? We couldn't be so lucky.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, March 09, 2009

Advice for Conservatives Trying to Grow Their Numbers

Ronald Reagan was noted for saying that "I didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me." That messaged resonated with millions of Americans and led to the rise of "Reagan Democrats." Many of them left that Democratic Party too and some (but certainly not all) of them, joined the GOP. This was part of the Reagan formula for success. It was about values, philosophy, and worldview. It had little to do with parties.

In 1980, I was a student at Abilene Christian University and was Chairman of that school's Young Conservatives of Texas chapter. I was also a regional coordinator of Students for Reagan. I was attracted to certain ideas and not partisanship. In my area, Grant Jones was a conservative state senator and also a Democrat. Back then, Charlie Stenholm was a conservative Democrat Congressman. I consistently voted for each of them back in those days because their Republican opponents ran to the left of them.

At this time, there was a Young Republicans chapter at my school and many of them use to say, after the Gipper, got the nomination, "Reagan in '80, Bush in '81." Reagan was the oldest man elected President and you see how these GOP activists thought about his future.

The Republican Party at that time was dominated by people that, today, we would call "Republicans in Name Only" (RINOs). The GOP had an Eastern Establishment bent that saw followers of Reagan as among the "unwashed masses" and a necessary evil to promote their cause. Thanks to Reagan, things changed some what. It became "cool" to be conservative.

Some where over the last two decades, things changed again. When the GOP did something well (fight the war on terrorism, cut taxes for job creation, increase economic growth, etc.), they were remarkably silent. Instead, they tried to get fame in a sick form of "me tooism." The left believes government needs to bailout financial institutions and the automobile industry. The GOP's response is "we do too." As a result, I hear conservatives defend Bush's bailout policies. This is a terrible mistake. We should only embrace a candidate's policies that reflect our values and not the candidate because of his party affiliation. Conservative and Republican are not necessarily the same thing. The last several years have shown that.
Conservatives who continue to defend Republicans who behave like Democrats are like the "co-dependents" who always apologize for their drunk spouse and abusive friends. People who know such individuals (either the abuser or the abused) tend to lose sympathy and in our case, will only chase away potential supporters to our cause. If we want to grow our ranks, we need to stop defending Republicans for being Republicans in Name Only and hold them to the same high standards we have for Democrats. That will disarm Democrats and independents who think our agenda is only agenda and will make them feel comfortable to look more closely at our positions.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , ,

Friday, March 06, 2009

What we can Learn About Business From Forrest Gump

One of my favorite films is Forrest Gump. It is full of great values on family, friends, morality, and life. Although its principal character is fairly cut and dry in terms of his integrity, this movie is not a simple fairy tale. It is a strong statement on how the choices people make matter.

During the film, Gump promises to go into the shrimp business with his good friend Pvt. Benjamin Buford “Bubba” Blue. Unfortunately, Blue died in the war, but Gump was a man of his word and he decided to go full speed ahead in making a company in his buddy’s name as soon as he got the money. In a turn of events that only Forrest could enjoy, Gump found himself in business and out on a boat trying to make a living catching shrimp. Unfortunately, Gump was late to coming to this market and found he was struggling to make ends meet. All the old timers knew the best place to find shrimp and poor Forrest was out cold. He didn’t give up, however, and through determination and prayer he found himself prepared for the opportunity of a lifetime.

However, it didn’t look like the opportunity of a lifetime when it came upon him. Instead, it looked like the end. A massive storm hit his port city and the vast majority of the competition hid from it and put their boats on the shore. They had a “bunker” mentality and a “buckling down” attitude and the result was the destruction of virtually all the ships. This was not the case for Forrest Gump who stayed on the boat and on the water; his aggressive attitude made him one of the only survivors of the storm.

Today, more people are interested in marketing than any point I have ever seen. The era of low hanging fruit is over and people know they have to go after potential clients. The question is how to do it. I have friends telling me about phenomenal marketing opportunities and can’t make a decision. They are simply stuck. What is preventing these people from making a decision? The biggest reservation is time commitment. They understand that virtually all marketing has a ramp up period before it reaches its effectiveness, but don’t know about committing for six months or more. My question is, “what do you plan on doing in six months?”
Those who do nothing will find themselves like those poor souls that were competitors of Forrest Gump. Their customers will disappear in this stormy economy while those who are aggressive will prosper. Unless you honestly plan on doing something else for a living a year from now, consider your marketing as a long term prospect and not a short term action. This economy will go to the brave and the bold, not to the faint of heart.


This article originally appeared at CNN650.com, part of the CBS Radio Network.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am). Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business and says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com.

Labels: , , , ,

Ten Pillars of Economic Wisdom: Now More than Ever

During the Great Depression the size of government grew exponentially and many believed that the United States had lost those essential principles that made this country the most prosperous on the face of the earth. It was during this time that an organization was formed, called the American Economic Foundation (AEF), and they put together the following “Ten Pillars”* to remind Americans what works in an economy. If people wondered if a policy was good and beneficial to everyone concerned, than it would stand the test of these Pillars.

In the 1990s, I was a Senior Fellow at AEF and I conducted seminars in the former Soviet Union about these principles and how they could be a guiding light to that region that suffered from decades of Communist totalitarianism. Today, we are about to slip into a command economy of our own where the government will seek to be in charge of all things. Today, with the Obama Administration, this country needs to be reminded of these principles now more than ever. You are going to see these principles frequently in my blog, in the Price of Business pages, and on the radio. These principles are a guiding light towards a free economy.

1. Nothing in our material world can come from nowhere or go nowhere, nor can it be free: everything in our economic life has a source, a destination, and a cost that must be paid.

Simply put, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Everything has a cost regardless of promises from politicians.


2. Government is never a source of goods. Everything produced is produced by the people, and everything that government gives to the people, it must first take from the people.

Recently, 25 percent of Americans who were asked in a survey how the government pays for its programs said it was because the US "has its own money." Those people need to be familiar with this Pillar. The bailouts we have seen cost plenty and will have a profound impact on our economy.


3. The only valuable money that government has to spend is that money taxed or borrowed out of the people’s earnings. When government decides to spend more than it has thus received, that extra unearned money is created out of thin air, through the banks, and, when spent, takes on value only by reducing the value of all money, savings, and insurance.

Much of the new spending we have seen by Obama (and Bush) is being financed by fiat money (essentially counterfeit) and will result in rampant inflation. Other parts of the spending will be paid for by future generations. Finally, some will be paid by foreign governments who invest in such debt (making us dependent on regimes, like China).

4. In our modern exchange economy, all payroll and employment come from customers, and the only worthwhile job security is customer security; if there are no customers, there can be no payroll and no jobs.
Labor unions have long tried to create an economic world that is detached from reality. If labor wants job security, they must accommodate customers. There is no other way to assure long term job stability.


5. Customer security can be achieved by the worker only when he cooperates with management in doing the things that win and hold customers. Job security, therefore, is a partnership problem that can be solved only in a spirit of understanding and cooperation.
Unions often want an adversarial relationship with business, but job security can only come if the two are partners pursuing customers together.


6. Because wages are the principal cost of everything, widespread wage increases, without corresponding increase in production, simply increase the cost of everybody’s living.

An example of this is minimum wage. When it goes up, so do prices, and if the job isn't worth the wage, it will be lost. This solves the mystery as to why minimum wage increases are both rare and devastating.


7. The greatest good for the greatest number means, in its material sense, the greatest goods for the greatest number which, in turn, means the greatest productivity per worker.
Production is the best way to keep an economy strong, and those who participate in it growing financially. The best way to encourage productivity is for a government to keep the costs of production as low as possible. This is done through a stable money supply, low taxes, and few regulations.


8. All productivity is based on three factors: 1) natural resources (NR), whose form, place and condition are changed by the expenditure of 2) human energy (HE) (both muscular and mental), with the aid of 3) tools (T).

This is straight forward enough. These three factors make up the totality of the economy. As a formula, this is seen at NR + HE x T = Man's Material Welfare.


9. Tools are the only one of these three factors that man can increase without limit, and tools come into being in a free society only when there is a reward for the temporary self-denial that people must practice in order to channel part of their earnings away from purchases that produce immediate comfort and pleasure, and into new tools of production. Proper payment for the use of tools is essential to their creation.

Tools are the only one of these that can increase without limit. An example of this is agriculture, which was the dominant industry in the late 1700s and early 1800s, with the majority of our population working in that area. Today, the number who work in it are in the single digits and the abundance of food could not be greater. Tools are what have changed everything.


10. The productivity of the tools--that is, the efficiency of the human energy applied in connection with their use--has always been highest in a competitive society in which the economic decisions are made by millions of progress-seeking individuals, rather than in a state-planned society in which those decisions are made by a handful of all-powerful people, regardless of how well-meaning, unselfish, sincere and intelligent those people may be.

The genius of the many individuals when it comes to economic prosperity is always greater than the few or even the majority that would impose its view of "fairness" on the economy. This is the "invisible hand" that Adam Smith spoke of so eloquently in his The Wealth of Nations.

These Pillars are factual, logical, and without a political agenda. They provide excellent benchmarks on what works in the economic system. Pass this tool on to others who are trying to figure out the headlines and let freedom ring!


Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.


*An internationally accepted working paper developed by The American Economic Foundation

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Tea Parties are Reminders of Howard Jarvis and Eddie Chiles

When I first got involved in politics as a teenager in the late 1970s, it was during a massive tax revolt against a government that had grown out of control. The highest income tax rate was hovering around 70 percent. This attack on capital formation did not only weaken the economy, but under minded freedom itself and the ability for individuals to pursue their aspirations.

The man who came to the rescue and who fought the battle of middle America who were being pounded by taxes was Ronald Reagan. But, in many respects, Reagan was a product of what was going on in the political culture at that time. For decades Americans were told that the patriotic thing to do was to pay taxes. Many more taxes. Reagan believed the patriotic thing was to hold government accountable for its spending and that the American people fundamentally knew how to manage their money better than government.


Reagan's message resonated because of individuals like Howard Jarvis in California who led the Proposition 13 drive that changed the way people would be taxed and Eddie Chiles of Texas who said that he -- like millions of other Americans -- was "mad as hell" over what the government was doing to American taxpayers.


In the June 5, 1978 edition of Time Magazine you find Howard Jarvis on the cover with his fist in the air. At that moment a grass root movement had finally received mainstream credibility. The article in the magazine stated that "rising taxes are a burning concern all over the U.S. In California, they are nothing less than an obsession, and small wonder." About the movement's leader, it stated that "the furor has turned Howard Jarvis, 75, into a statewide folk hero to millions of Californians, a demagogic devil to others. A retired millionaire manufacturer, Jarvis has been railing against high taxes for 15 years. Jarvis, whose face looks a bit like a California mudslide, has been demolishing debating opponents with his oddly compelling blend of verbosity, profanity and humbug." His supporters included the great economist, Milton Friedman, who did TV commercials for free and it stated that "former Governor Ronald Reagan has rallied behind Jarvis." That last line was an understatement. In June in 1978 when this article was written, Reagan was considered a political "has been" and a perennial candidate who would not have a prayer if he ran for President again in 1980. This tax revolt movement became a major driver that helped to put Reagan in office.


A little further south you had a gentleman I knew named Eddie Chiles, who also rose up in business (while Jarvis was in manufacturing, Chiles was in the energy field) to become an advocate of smaller government who also rose to the scene in the late 1970s. The New York Times pointed out in an obituary for Chiles that "as a businessman, he shared his views in the late 1970's, usually about some government affront to business, through a series of radio commercials in which he proclaimed, 'I'm Eddie Chiles, and I'm mad." The commercials were broadcast on 650 stations in 14 states where Western (Company of North America, which he owned) had operations and spawned almost a million bumper stickers reading, 'I'm mad too, Eddie.'" Eddie helped fuel the flames that led to the rise of Reagan.

People are mad as hell today and you see this in the rise of the new tea parties. Among the thousands who are going to the streets we will find our next Jarvis and Chiles. Also, on the political landscape, we will find the right elected officials who will carry this message to Washington. Some may be merely running for Congress in 2010, others may already be in office, but they all have far more to be mad about today than we did in the 1970s when the anti-tax movement began. The federal budget in 2008 was $2.7 trillion. The government has increased that budget by more than fifty percent in the last six months alone. This will be paid for with funny money (inflation) and by raising the taxes of those who make more than $250,000 a year (the same people who create most of the jobs). I'm mad too, Eddie and so are millions of other Americans.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, March 02, 2009

Market Drops Below 7,000

I was a doomsayer in the eyes of many when I said the market would go below 8,000. Today, I'm seeing it skid well below 7,000 and it shows no sign of going back up. This is the lowest level in over a decade. Sure, there is plenty of time in the day, but it doesn't look good.

So what is driving the massive market decline? As usual, the news headlines are driving stock prices. The big headline today is Barack Obama's breath taking new budget proposal. Kevin Hasset points out in Bloomberg.com that "The gap between rhetoric and hype in President Barack Obama’s budget is as wide as the Pacific Ocean. Obama has not offered change; he has offered a continuation of George W. Bush’s policies. Obama is not the anti-Bush. He is Bush on steroids." I couldn't agree more and will go a step further...Obama's policies are the next logical step in the actions taken by Bush towards institutional socialism. People need to get past party and ideological lines and squarely place criticism where it belongs -- both among Republicans and Democrats.

How "big" is Obama's spending? Hasset notes the comparison between Bush's numbers and Obama's: "In January 2008, the Congressional Budget Office put out a 10-year forecast that included a projection for government spending. The forecast, at the end of the Bush spending spree, saw government spending in 2009 at about $3 trillion, increasing to $4.3 trillion by 2018."
These numbers seem outrageously high, but didn't even hit the reality. "federal spending for 2009 turned out $900 billion higher than was expected, because of the near-term policies associated with the financial crisis and the recession. Lost amid the hype about Obama cutting the deficit in half, however, is the fact that most of this higher spending sticks. Obama plans to spend $4.9 trillion in 2018, about $550 billion higher than the CBO’s projection. That’s right, $550 billion more."

Finally, Hasset notes that "looking at the entire 10 years, and extrapolating out the CBO number to include an estimate for 2019, Obama has proposed that government spending over the next 10 years be $5.3 trillion higher than the CBO projected just last year." Let's put this in perspective, in 2008 (before the massive spending increases in September) the entire budget of the federal government was only (I know, don't laugh) $2.7 trillion. This is a level that took over two centuries to reach. Obama intends to double that number in the next ten years. This budget shouldn't just make Wall Street nervous, but every single American should worry about their financial lives.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Labels: , , , , ,