“There is no difference in principle, … between the economic philosophy of Nazism, socialism, communism, and fascism and that of the American welfare state and regulated economy.” – Jacob G. Hornberger
In his famed poem, Mending Wall, the American poet, Robert Frost chided the rock wall that he and his neighbor would mend each spring, replacing fallen rocks. “He is all pine and I am apple orchard. My apple trees will never get across and eat the cones under his pines, I tell him. He only says, ‘Good fences make good neighbors.’
You can see the Great Wall of China from outer space. It is an astonishing piece of work
Begun in the fifth century B.C. and added to by later dynasties, it succeeded in defending China from invasions by northern tribes. In 1600, it helped the Ming dynasty defend against the Manchu, but when the gates at Shanhaiguan were opened in 1644 by a dissident Ming border general, the Manchus quickly seized Beijing and that was the end of the Ming dynasty.
There has been a growing call for a wall on the U.S. southern border with Mexico. Given the way Mexico has fallen into a state of barbaric anarchy by warring narcotics gangs, including increasing murders of Americans foolish enough to go there, it is a very good idea.
There are currently an estimated twelve million Mexicans and “other” illegal aliens residing in the United States, enjoying many benefits. Instead of aggressively dealing with the problem, the government under several administrations and the current one has opted to offer “amnesty” and grant them a citizenship they have not earned and do not deserve in the context of our laws.
The only thing these amnesties managed to accomplish was to encourage more millions of illegal aliens to cross our borders, to stay on beyond their visas, and to otherwise flout our immigration laws. They are not “undocumented”. They are criminals.
Naturally, when British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently gave speeches or expressed their opposition to “multiculturalism”, it made news when it turned out they were appalled by the failure of this idiotic concept. Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, had already expressed that opinion.
There was a time when someone was proudly British, French or German. Today, their distinctive cultures are being hollowed out by waves of immigrants who have no desire to assimilate or adopt the values of their new homelands.
All of which raises the question of why, here in America, you have to “press one” to conduct a conversation in English, Islamic foot baths have been installed in the Kansas City airport, why ‘Islamic immersion’ classes have been inflicted on children in a California school district, there was a demand an Arabic public school in New York and a mosque within sight of Ground Zero, and why government documents are often printed in foreign languages.
The victory over Europe that the Muslims could not achieve by invasion and which ended with the defeat of a Muslim army outside of Vienna on September 11, 1683, has been achieved by a constant flow of immigrants from the Middle East and northern Africa as Europe opened its doors because their indigenous populations failed to reproduce in enough numbers to maintain their economies.
It is a principle of demographics that, as a nation becomes more prosperous its population tends to replace itself more slowly. Birthrates in America across the racial spectrum are in decline, reflecting those in Europe By contrast, places like China and India are where you find a billion or more people.
In 2008 Los Angeles County, population 10.2 million, was where 42% of workers were paid cash and did not pay taxes; 90% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles were for illegal aliens; more than two-thirds of all births were to illegal aliens; nearly 40% of all inmates in California were Mexican nationals who were there illegally; and, nationally, while less than 2% of illegal aliens were picking crops, 37% were on welfare.
These and a mountain of other statistics testify to the failure of the American government to enforce its immigration laws and deter an army of illegal immigrants from invading the nation.
The argument will be raised that America is “a nation of immigrants”, but that was then and this is now. The earlier flow of immigrants from Ireland, Scotland, Italy, Germany and Russia were needed in the 1800s to provide workers for the nation’s industrial base and as farmers for its expanding land mass. And they were white and Christian.
“The importation of Afro-Americans as slaves, starting early in America’s history, led to the Civil War, followed by the horrid “Jim Crow” era until the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s. These days they are minority population smaller than Hispanics and, thanks to a variety of liberal welfare programs, are too often a dysfunctional element of American society.”
There is an unrelenting tyranny to demographics; the statistical study of migrations and birth rates of peoples throughout the world. Unless Europe and America address it, putting the breaks on further immigration, they are at risk of falling prey to it and failing as a result of it.
England, France and Germany’s leaders have finally begun to speak out about and against it. It may be too late. America refuses to even acknowledge it.
Alan Caruba’s commentaries are posted daily at “Warning Signs” his popular blog and thereafter on dozens of other websites and blogs
President Obama stood in front of the Chamber of Commerce last week and told American businesses to “get in the game” by investing their massive cash reserves to stimulate jobs, demand and overall economic growth.
Whether the president’s call for the private sector to invest more aggressively is successful depends on the theory one has about why businesses have stayed on the sidelines to this point, not investing their mountains of cash.
The theory implicit in the president’s speech is that the business community has simply not been paying close enough attention, that it has overlooked promising investment opportunities.
But another theory is that the business community has been paying very close attention — most particularly to the president himself — and what it sees is cause for concern.
Under this theory, businesses may not see the president as having made a gentle suggestion that they reconsider investment opportunities that are attractive on their own terms. Instead, they may fear he’s made a demand that they deploy their capital or face consequences.
The president is right to compare big markets with big games. But the game to envision is not football but poker. Successful firms are sophisticated players. They don’t show up to the table without a large stake. The mountains of cash companies are hoarding provide plenty of bank for that purpose.
We think the administration might want to consider the hypothesis that the particular context of its own interactions with business may support the alternative theory about why the president’s recent remarks may not help. The extraordinary degree and nature of the particular changes to the basic rules of the game that this administration already has overseen may be big reasons why cash is hoarded.
But they also don’t ante up if they think that any moment in the middle of the hand the dealer is likely to announce that the wild cards are deuces, kings and one-eye jacks, until he decides they are not.
OMB director Jacob Lew was grilled first by the House Budget Committee and then by its Senate counterpart. On the House side, Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) let him have it. In his opening remarks, Ryan made clear how far off base is Obama’s proposal:
Instead of confronting our debt head on, the President has presented us with a budget that spends too much, borrows too much and taxes too much. His budget would double the amount of debt held by the public by the end of his term – and triple it by the tenth anniversary of his inauguration.
To be sure, our country was already on an unsustainable trajectory before he took office. Our debt is the product of acts by many presidents and many Congresses over many years. Both parties share the blame.
Nevertheless, this President’s policies have accelerated us down this disastrous path. He has made our spending problems worse with policies such as the failed stimulus and the new health care entitlement.
He has argued for massive tax increases that would stifle economic growth and make our fiscal picture worse — this budget alone contains $1.6 trillion in higher taxes on American families, businesses and entrepreneurs.
And on our nation’s most pressing fiscal challenges, the President has abdicated his leadership role. First, he punted to a bipartisan commission to develop solutions to the problem.
Then, when his own commission put forward a set of fundamental entitlement and tax reforms, he ignored them. Erskine Bowles, the Democratic chairman of the fiscal commission, said the White House budget request goes “nowhere near where they will have to go to resolve our fiscal nightmare.”
He even failed to take the commission’s advice on less sensitive subjects, such as discretionary spending: His budget would increase discretionary spending by $353 billion relative to the commission’s proposals.
And it didn’t get any easier thereafter for Lew
Later in the day, in a moment of high drama and remarkable clarity in the Senate, the top Republican, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), delivered this tongue-lashing to Lew:
The president may have underestimated the fortitude of his political opponents and the disgust many Americans feel about the failure of government to live — even remotely — within its means.