Michael Campbell: Biggest Village Idiot North of Crawford, TX

There's a talk radio station that I often listen to here in BC, CKNW. It consists of all local hosts with a variety of backgrounds, so I do like the balance that exists.

One commentator who I cannot stand is Michael Campbell. He's actually the brother of the current Premier of BC, Gordon Campbell, which is scary. Michael Campbell talks about money and economic issues and is constantly repeating key neo-conservative talking points such as "welfare state" and "don't tax the rich or businesses" or, the biggest tell: "big government." He also likes to talk contemptously of the fools who don't agree with him. He says that economics is simple and easy to understand and other such naive crap that it astounds me that he's tolerated as a economic commentator here. He loves to dwell on the failures of the Greek economy, which he honestly believes is due to too many "entitlements."

Now, I don't know much about economics, I admit that, but I do have this blog to ramble. So ramble I shall! Also, I do know a bit about current events and the state of the US economy.

What part of the near total collapse of the US economy does Michael Campbell NOT understand? The US was the result of 30 years of government deregulation and unfunded tax cuts which were directed mainly at the rich. All the talk of give the rich and big business big tax breaks to create jobs was complete and utter nonsense. Give the rich a tax break - they invest it! Give big business a tax break - they give bonuses to the rich guys and shareholders rake in more big bucks.

Where was the middle class in all this? Bearing the burden for the rich and the big businesses. The US is the ultimate experiment in free (mind boggingly free, i.e. Gulf of Mexico) market. The Reagan experiment of "trickle down" economics has been demonstrated, over and over again since Obama entered office that this unfettered economy is a disaster.

Also, Campbell's simple-minded philosophy doesn't take into account the one important factor: human nature. Specifically, it does not take human greed into account. Give big businesses more money? They keep it. Give the rich tax breaks? They spend it on themselves. Campbell probably thinks that the business will actually hire more people or pass savings on to their customers. Nope - that's not what has happened in the US and it will not happen anywhere else. Any economic philosophy that ignores human greed will lead to economic ruin for the majority of people.

We've learned the end result of Michael Campell's economic philosophy:

Any questions?

Time for a new metaphor??

Now that Obama's in (was there ever any doubt?) there are a few commentators - the conservative types - who are saying stuff like - "Well, he can't keep his promises on taxes, especially to the richer types - that would be disastrous!" One of those commentators is Michael Campbell - big time financial guru here in BC - who can't even pronounce Obama's name correctly. Imagine: O-BAM-AH. If Canadians keep this pronunciation up, I will retaliate with CAH-NAY-DAH!
Anywhoo... I was thinking about Obama stating that we need to get rid of this old ecomomic model of "trickle down" theory. This, I believe, was started by Reagan (who Obama has thoroughly studied and I believe admires in some ways -- wait : a president who STUDIES something, as in, READING???? What a difference!!) This 'trickle down' theory is a tired metaphor. If you try to hold water, some of it always trickles down. The problem is, there is no trickling....the economy has nothing.
A better metaphor may be of a glutton. The glutton is at the table, slamming down all the food he can get his hands on. As he eats quickly, food flies off the table: We are just getting the crumbs. This displays the need for a different system: We need to take some of that food off of the table and actually give it to the poor souls on the floor. The trouble with 'trickle down' is that it doesn't take into account human greed and the creativity of the human to discover ways (loopholes) for keeping the most food on the table.
This is what we've had and the system is collapsing due to human greed. The gluttons at the top are crying over the loss of food. That's all there is to it.

Free Education for all???

I just had a quick flash of insight and I'm just putting it down here. Why do we insist on free education for all? Why do the well-off people or even those who could afford a minimal fee not charged? Why does it have to be free?

Why not have free education only for those who truly need it? I just thought of President Clinton sending Chelsea to public schools - why shouldn't the Clintons be charged for going to any school?

I'm not thinking that everyone pay full tuition - just that a user fee be charged for education. We now have this overgrown dinosaur called education - something that basically has been done the same way for 100 years and we think it should be free for all. We have a school close by to me, I think it's in Deroche, where most of the kids are First Nations and this school has basically no supplies, library, etc. The districts that collect huge amount of taxes should actually be paying into a pot - the neediest districts, i.e., lower-income - should be able to draw more than the 'richest'. The richest can use user fees to make up the shortfall in their money. Same thing for health care in Canada, by the way.

Now that I've solved the world's economic woes - I'm gonna have lunch.