The Patriot Post Brief 7-8-2013

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Brief 7-8-2013
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Part-Time Nation

July 8, 2013

The Foundation

"It is of the greatest consequence that the debt should ... be remoulded into such a shape as will bring the expenditure of the nation to a level with its income. Till this shall be accomplished, the finances of the United States will never wear proper countenance." --Alexander Hamilton

For the Record

"The economy1 lost 240,000 full-time workers last month, according to the more volatile household survey, while gaining 360,000 part-time workers. In other words, the entire increase in the household measure of employment was accounted for by persons working part-time for economic reasons. The underemployment rate surged to 14.3% from 13.8%. ... There are 28 million part-time workers in US vs. 25 million before the Great Recession. There are 116 million full-time workers in US vs. 122 million before the Great Recession. In other words, 19% of the (smaller) US workforce is part time vs. 17% before the Great Recession. Some context: Even at 195,000 jobs a month, the US would not, according to Brookings, return to pre-Great Recession employment levels until 2021. ... Oh, there are some positives. Private-sector jobs were up 202,000. Since the sequester took effect, total nonfarm jobs are up an average of 183,000 per month versus 132,000 for same four months a year ago. ... The labor force participation rate, while still low, has risen two months in a row. ... Fine. While the labor market may be improving enough for the Fed, for American workers the Long Recession continues." --columnist James Pethokoukis2

Political Futures

"The bombshell that just dropped is not 4th of July fireworks -- it was the White House announcing that it was delaying enforcement3 of the employer-mandate in ObamaCare until 2015. ... It will simply be much too busy to penalize those violating the mandate, an executive power grab that is familiar from their playbook on education, climate change, and elsewhere. The policy implications are fairly straightforward. Essentially for calendar 2014 the act of dropping coverage and dumping employees into the exchanges is on sale. Drop and dump, but no penalty. Accelerating the rush of employers to the exits is bad news for taxpayers. At a minimum, the federal revenue from fines is gone. More realistically, the costs of already-bloated insurance subsidies will escalate and the red ink will rise. ... Why do it? Politics. Democrats no longer face the immediate specter of running against the fallout from a heavy regulatory imposition on employers across the land. Explaining away the mandate was going to be a big political lift; having the White House airbrush it from the landscape is way better." --American Action Forum's Douglas Holtz-Eakin4

Government

"It is the political machinations here that are important. Since the individual mandate remains in effect, those employees who would have received insurance through their employers will have to purchase health insurance, or face a fine beginning next year. When 2015 rolls around, many companies that may have been willing to pay their employees' insurance may decide to pay the fine instead, since their employees will have already had their own insurance for a year. As more and more businesses opt for this solution, the entire concept of employer-sponsored insurance ... will begin to unravel. ... As an increasing number of individuals who might have originally been covered by their employer begin to flood into the exchanges, even more chaos will be created. Fox News' Chris Stirewalt explains why such chaos may be exactly what Democrats want. ... 'Because it's the only way to get what the Obama Democrats have wanted all along: A government-run system open to all Americans and the eventual demise of the employer-based insurance system that has been the norm since the end of World War II.' ... In other words, much like Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, once the entitlement genie is out of the bottle it stays out forever. And just like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, when the inevitable cost explosion occurs, the best Americans can hope for will be a 'fix,' that will entail a combination of higher taxes and a reduced level of care." --columnist Arnold Ahlert5

Opinion in Brief

"The simple fact is that [ousted Egyptian President Muhammad] Morsi has achieved in just one year what it took his predecessor, Hosni Mubarak, three decades to do: completely antagonize Egyptian society. ... President Obama has been like a gambler who only wants to place his bets once he sees the cards on the table. But it's long past time the United States sees the big picture. ... When Iranians sought to break free from their Islamist dictatorship in 2009, Obama was silent. And when, more recently, Turkish liberals sought to check the power of an increasingly authoritarian Islamist leader, the State Department appeared again to support the Islamist leader over the people. The third time, however, might be the charm. Egyptians recognized that what the Islamists were peddling was a corruption of religion in the pursuit of power. Democracy was just a show for them, rhetoric to throw at Western reporters and diplomats, but not an ideal to embrace sincerely. Such is a lesson that Iranians, Turks, and Egyptians have all learned the hard way." --American Enterprise Institute's Michael Rubin6

The Gipper

"No longer can it be said that conservatives are just anti-Communist. We are, and proudly so, but we are also the keepers of the flame of liberty. ... American foreign policy is not simply focused on the prevention of war but the expansion of freedom. Modern conservatism is an active, not a reactive philosophy. It's not just in opposition to those vices that debase character and community, but affirms values that are at the heart of civilization." --Ronald Reagan7

Essential Liberty

"In our time, many seem to think 'the Declaration' was penned to proclaim eternal verities about the human condition -- a poetic tribute to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' -- as if it were a collection of fine words about high-minded ideals. No! It was a rebellion against bad governance, against political arrogance, against oppressive laws, against restriction, constraint, and imposition without representation. We call it 'the Declaration,' but that's not the object. It's the 'Independence,' stupid. The members of the Second Continental Congress did not expect to forfeit their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor for stating the obvious about the 'laws of nature and of nature's God.' Their necks ripened for the noose because they altered, abolished, and threw off the yoke of their government. They counted all as loss to obtain freedom; to be absolved of allegiance to their government, to dissolve all political connections between themselves and the state which they had always referred to as their own. 'The Declaration' offers exhaustive reasons for committing open treason, nonetheless, treason it was. Independence Day then is not a celebration of government, but a regular reminder ... of the necessity to reject corrupt, abusive government." --PJMedia's Scott Ott8

Insight

"The worst enemies of enduring freedom for all may be certain folk who demand incessantly more liberty for themselves." --historian Russell Kirk (1918-1994)

Re: The Left

"Leaders of the left in many countries have promoted policies that enable the poor to be more comfortable in their poverty. But that raises a fundamental question: Just who are 'the poor'? ... 'Poverty' once had some concrete meaning -- not enough food to eat or not enough clothing or shelter to protect you from the elements, for example. Today it means whatever the government bureaucrats, who set up the statistical criteria, choose to make it mean. ... Most Americans with incomes below the official poverty level have air-conditioning, television, own a motor vehicle and, far from being hungry, are more likely than other Americans to be overweight. But an arbitrary definition of words and numbers gives them access to the taxpayers' money. This kind of 'poverty' can easily become a way of life, not only for today's 'poor,' but for their children and grandchildren. Even when they have the potential to become productive members of society, the loss of welfare state benefits if they try to do so is an implicit 'tax' on what they would earn that often exceeds the explicit tax on a millionaire. If increasing your income by $10,000 would cause you to lose $15,000 in government benefits, would you do it? In short, the political left's welfare state makes poverty more comfortable, while penalizing attempts to rise out of poverty." --economist Thomas Sowell9