Who You Gonna Call-Not the Democrats or Republicans

Amidst the fervor of extreme loyalists on both sides, it’s easy to get lost in the fog of political rhetoric. Few people truly understand what either side plans to do to tackle our most pressing issues—inflation, Abortion, hot and potential wars, and debt. This confusion is not accidental but a result of both sides’ contradictory positions. They present their plan with conviction, only to undermine it in the next breath.

There is little doubt inflation underlies our economic discontent. No matter how hard we work, even receiving pay raises, we have less at the end of the month. That new house or auto keeps getting further out of reach. The little extras, an evening out or a quick vacation that makes life enjoyable, are outside the budget. The Great Inflation of the 1970s ended when double-digit interest rates ended in a deep recession. What are our two parties proposing to avoid a repeat?

The simple definition of inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods. One gains control over inflation by cutting down on excess dollars, increasing the amount of goods, or both. So, what do the two major parties propose to improve in these areas?

The Democrats gave us the “Inflaton Reduction Act,” with its likely trillion-dollar price tag, it’s putting more dollars out there. Enormous subsidies for expensive electric vehicles (EVs) require materials such as lithium batteries, which are not readily available here. Most come from China, allowing that nation to produce cheaper EVs. Denying Chinese producers subsidies through local content rules and high tariffs will protect our high-cost auto companies. Favoring unionized plants will further increase prices. These problems extend to solar panels and windmills, which are also subsidized by this act, guaranteeing their high costs.

Continue reading

Three Story Lines Revisited

It was a busy week with significant developments. Three of them fall in areas I’ve commented on in the past. It’s crucial to compare where we are with what I wrote on the third parties, the Gaza war, and abortion, as these past commentaries hold significant relevance to our current situation.

In my series, ‘The Future Party” (On this Site), I stressed the pressing need for a more competitive political landscape. We must enhance our choices at all levels. Recent presidential elections have presented us with candidates most Americans didn’t want to vote for. The current election, featuring two widely unpopular candidates, is a stark reminder of this issue. The ‘No Labels Party,’ which pledged to offer more options, should’ve thrived in this climate. While it has made progress in securing spots on state ballots, they’re facing a lot of work getting candidates. 

In my series, ‘The Future Party,” I concluded that you can’t defeat someone without one and must stand for something. I based my brief involvement with the emerging Howard Shultz third-party campaign on crafting a platform for the Starbucks founder to champion. However, no such platform materialized, and Shultz withdrew when it appeared he could potentially harm the Democrats, thereby inadvertently supporting the re-election of the Republican incumbent. This excuse is a stark reminder that new voices must have substance and conviction to make a lasting impact.

Continue reading