Close window | View original article
From the first moment the settlers at Jamestown stepped onto dry land, America has been a progressive country in its original, literal meaning - that is, we seek out and desire progress and improvement. The colonists came to make a better life for themselves in every meaning of the word. Yes, they wanted liberty and freedom of worship, but even the Pilgrims and Puritans believed they could make a more economically successful life for themselves on this side of the pond, away from the King's regulations and monopolies.
The very Declaration of Independence cited King George's outrageous and excessive regulators as a reason for revolution:
He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat [out] their substance.
From that day almost to this, a primary goal of every American government has been to improve the daily lives of the American people in the physical sense. The result has been what is by far the most materially wealthy society in the history of all mankind.
The last two centuries of history have made it extremely difficult for ordinary Americans to even conceive of a government whose express purpose is the exact opposite. What sort of leader would not want his people to be richer, have more comforts, more toys, a better life in every way?
Alas, we've got one now, and Barack Obama wasn't shy about saying so. Regarding energy:
Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.
Our modern world runs on electricity; all economic activity requires the use of electricity. Mr. Obama is saying that he intends to make everything more expensive on purpose, and thus each of us will have less of whatever it is that we want.
Is this an unfortunate but necessary sacrifice? Not at all, it's the whole point:
We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK.
We have extensively debunked the proven fraud of global warming throughout the pages of Scragged, and it would be redundant to address the issue here. Suffice it to say that Barack Obama specifically and explicitly believes that Americans need to forcibly get poorer in every meaningful way, beginning with energy but extending to, quite literally, all the comforts of home.
How does he intend to bring this enforced poverty to pass? No, he won't be sending agents around to bash down your doors and steal your stuff; he'll just ensure that you can't afford it in the first place.
Consider his view on coal-powered electrical generating plants, the backbone of America's power grid and source of much of our cheap energy. President Obama fully realizes that there are such a thing as private property rights, and he wouldn't dream of actually forcibly stopping the existence of coal power plants, oh no!
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.
It has been said that the power to tax is the power to destroy. Energy runs the modern world. Mr. Obama has decided to tax it, with the objective of destroying it. He wants us peasants to freeze in the dark!
Could it be that this is an oversight? Not in the least, as the National Review reports. The EPA's ridiculous ethanol mandates have driven up the price of gas and food because we are pouring our corn into our cars instead of our bellies, at great expense.
The law allows the EPA to suspend ethanol requirements in times of economic hardship. However, predictably, the EPA has refused to do so. Apparently it's more important that we be forced to burn trendy ethanol in our cars, even though it's far more expensive than gas and does nothing to benefit the environment, than that people be able to eat.
What we are seeing is something new in American history: the power of government being used, not to benefit the nation or its people, but actually to harm them on purpose.
Are we being too harsh? Remember Mr. Obama's own statements in his first round of presidential debates, when he said he wanted to raise taxes even if it brought in less revenue to the Treasury. For him, the goal wasn't having more money to spend, it was simply punishing Evil Rich People.
Time after time after time, in speech after speech, Mr. Obama has emphasized the evils of business, the glories of government, and the absolute moral necessity for us all to live poorer - except for himself and his minions, of course. There has never been an American administration dedicated to the destruction of America's economic power, so we almost don't know how to think about it, but it's what we've got.
Under those circumstances, if the government is not merely obtuse and in the way but actively trying to destroy your business, what sane businessman would ever dream of making an investment of any kind? Much better to hide your money far, far away.
So Mr. Obama's War on Coal and productive businesses in general continues into his second term, with no end in sight. Regulation upon regulation, from healthcare to pollution to "equality" will oppress and crush the animal spirits of the economy. It's enough to make you sick - but in Mr. Obama's America, any illness is a dangerous proposition, as we'll see in the next article in this series.