Thursday, August 25, 2011

America V. China: The Diplomacy Wars

Commentary on US Chinese Relations by Slim Fairview. 

Read my stuff today, or hear it from experts in a month or two. Slim.

The Pentagon noticed that China is expanding its navy.  They suspect that China is looking to expand its influence beyond Asian waters.  We pay analysts to tell us this.

This news reminds me of a job I had years ago.

One of the employees was a power lifter.  Another, was a body builder.  "The guys" tried to get them to have an arm wrestling match. (Money would be a stake.)  They both declined.  Nicely.

One did claim that he never lost an arm wrestling match.  He never said he was never in one.  He simply said that he'd never lost one.

The other simply declined to arm wrestle. However, he and I did pretend to arm wrestle one day.  He pretended to find me a worthy opponent.  However, as his arm was the size of my leg, this was all in jest.  Still, one of the younger employees asked in earnest if I really thought I could win.

Why bring this up?  In 1965 my teacher told the class, "Never think for a moment that the Soviet Union and Red China will go to war with each other."  They never did.

Red China is now The People's Republic of China.  The Soviet Union is, once again, Russia.

We never went to war with the Soviet Union.

However, when it came to the soft-wars, diplomacy, propaganda, influence, The Soviet Union clearly had the edge.  One factor was that they did, after all, occupy Eastern Europe.

Our second tactical error of World War Two was not listening to Lord Winston Churchill at the end of the war.  The First was before the war began.  That was when we ignored Lord Winston Churchill's admonition that the Nazis were going to go to war.

I do not believe that we will ever go to war with China.

However, what abut the soft-stuff?  Diplomacy, influence, international relations? [Global relations?]

"Never underestimate the Power of a symbolic gesture."  Old Chinese Saying.

"The Power of a symbolic gesture resides with the person making the gesture."  Slim Fairview

If history is any indicator, China will fare much better than we will.  We do have history to substantiate that.

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."  Santayana

"Those who never learned history are doomed--period!"  Slim Fairview

China? No. China!  9. March 2012 

China. Economics. Diversification

China. The Economy and a word beginning with the letter p. 

Misunderstanding China Again 5. November 2012

Underestimating China Again 3. December 2012

There I've posted several monographs on the impending failures of Western Diplomacy in the Middle East.  The analysts can figure out how they extend to impending Western Diplomatic Failures in the rest of the world.

Sincerest regards,


PS.  I am not Paul Harvey.  However, I am open to becoming a paid commentator, columnist, or blogger. If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.



Copyright © 2011-2012 Slim Fairview
All rights reserved.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

You Can't Lead if You Can't Manage 2.0


In a previous monograph, I detailed the handling of a problem management is required to deal with all the time.

That problem ostensibly focuses on the non-performer.  Actually, it focuses on the non-performing manager.  It illustrates how someone who knows how to manage does, and why he is considered a leader.

That example was limited to a team working on a project.  Now, we will focus on a higher level of activity.  Team leaders working on different projects.

In order to do this, we must create an analogy.  This time, however, we cannot use Athos, Porthos, Aramis, and D’Artagnan.

This analogy involves Wolf Blitzer, Candy Crowley, the fictitious Odious Thudpucker, and the big, important boss, Phil A. Bilgewater.

First, I will put two qualified individuals on display.

Wolf Blitzer and Candy Crowley are working on different stories at opposite ends of a large table.  Ms. Crowley is getting information together for a story.  She gathers what she needs, stands up, and says,

“Well, I’ve got what I need.  I’m going to head downtown to interview the Mayor; I should be back by three o’clock.”

“Good luck,” Mr. Blitzer says.

“Thank you,” Ms. Crowley says, and leaves.

The following day, Mr. Blitzer is still working on his story.  At the other end of the table is Odious Thudpucker.  Odious is gathering information for his story.  He gathers what he needs, stand up, and says,

“Well, I got what I need.  I’m gonna go interview the Mayor.  But first I’m stoppin’ off to talk to the director.  I wanna keep him in the loop.  Then, I’m gonna stop by and talk to the fact checkers, them I’m gonna go interview the Mayor.  I should be back by about three.  I may stop for a samwich, I dunno.  How you doin?  Okay.  If you need any help, I’ll be back around three.  Well, I guess I better go.”

He leaves.

Now, Wolf Blitzer, Candy Crowley, and Odious Thudpucker all have their assignments.  In plain English, however, Odious is no good.  He was hired by Mr. Bilgewater.  Bilgewater is no good at his job, either.  So, he calls a meeting and tells the three they all must attend.  This disrupts Mr. Blitzer’s and Ms. Crowley’s work.  Mr. Bilgewater tells them, “This is important.”  What he means is, “I think I am important.”  They all attend.

Mr. Bilgewater discusses the visioning process, shared vision, the importance of avoiding groupthink.  He discusses the importance of consensus building, which is really groupthink you paid a consultant to build.

In order for things to go more smoothly and to improve the quality of the journalism, Mr. Bilgewater is going to have Odious work with Ms. Crowley.

Ms. Crowley doesn’t say anything.  She knows that Odious Thudpucker is no good at his job.  Nor is Mr. Bilgewater.  She knows she will be doing Thudpucker’s job for him.  She knows he will junk up her report.  However, she bites the bullet and goes along with it.

This is what Ms. Crowley knows:

If Thudpucker’s story comes off well, he will take the credit.

If Thudpucker’s story fails, he will blame her.

If her story comes off well, Thudpucker will take the credit.

If her story fails, Bilgewater will hold her responsible—After all, “I had Odious Thudpucker work with you on that story to help you.”

When her story fails, Odious Thudpucker defends her to Mr. Bilgewater.

“It isn’t all Candy’s fault.  I had some good ideas and suggestions but I hesitated to push them.  I didn’t really feel comfortable making too many suggestions to help Candy improve her story.”

Mr. Bilgewater looks to Ms. Crowley.  “The purpose of having Odious help you was for you two to work as a team.  You should be more receptive, open to the ideas of others.  Let’s not have this again.”

Well, a string of disasters would have ensued.  However, Mr. Bilgewater has a boss.  His boss, Mr. Hammerhead reads my blog.  Not that he must.  He already knows this stuff.

He calls Ms. Crowley, Odious Thudpucker, and Mr. Bilgewater into his office.  He wants an explanation about this new arrangement.  He does not direct his question to Ms. Crowley.  He looks at Odious Thudpucker and Mr. Bilgewater.

Odious know his stuff.  He isn’t going to try to pull any fast ones with Mr. Hammerhead.  He has plan B. ready.  Throw Mr. Bilgewater under the bus.

Mr. Bilgewater knows what to expect.  He defends his decision.

“I am trying to build consensus.  I want my people to work as a team.  I learned this stuff at the Really Big, Important Seminar we had here last year.”

“Shut up, Bilgewater.”

“Yes, Sir.”

“From now on, Ms. Crowley works on her stories.  Mr. Blitzer works on his stories, and Odious Thudpucker works on his stories.  Got it!”

“Yes, Sir.”

“That was not a question.  Meeting over.”

Now, this is the point at which the critics see their opportunity to barge in and shift the focus to advance their agenda.

Two heads are better than one.  One person can’t do everything.  People need other people to help them.  People, people who need people.... You get the idea.

However, that is not the point of this presentation.

Wolf Blitzer has a story to work on.  He has a researcher look up information.  He has a fact checker check facts. He has an assistant go to the film department to get some file videos.  He puts his story together.

Candy Crowley has a story to work on.  She has a researcher look up information.  She asks a fact checker to check facts.  She asks an assistant to get some video from the files. She puts her story together.

Now we come to Odious Thudpucker.

Odious has a story to work on.  He needs research.  His demands are not merely vague they are confusing.  The researcher digs up the information he knows will be needed for the story.  Odious criticises his assistant.  He decides to get the information himself. Odious has the fact-checker check certain facts.  The facts he wants checked are not in question.  The ones that are, he tells her not to bother checking.  He sends an assistant for video from the files.  He doesn’t like the videos.  He gets some himself.  He gets a clip of young women in bikinis, people at a bar drinking vodka, and a car-chase scene.  This, he knows, will hold the interest of the audience.  His staff is rushed, pressured, confused, overworked, and feels a deepening resentment for Mr. Thudpucker and for Mr. Bilgewater who can’t manage and certainly can’t lead.

Wolf Blitzer’s story is a success.

Candy Crowley’s story is a success.

Odious Thudpucker’s story is a disaster.

Mr. Hammerhead can now deal with the problem.  He calls everyone into his office.  I can assure you this is not a meeting.

“What happened?”

“My staff.  I’m new. They question my ability.  They challenge my authority.  They aren’t team players.”

Bilgewater chimes in, “That’s what I was talking about, Mr. Hammerhead. Team building, consensus building, shared vision—“

“Shut up.”

“Yes, Sir.”

“You have the best researchers.  You have the best fact-checkers.  You have access to the best video files.  There is no excuse for this disaster you call a project.  This will not happen again.  You can go back to work.  Bilgewater, you stay.”

“Yes, Sir.”

Everyone leaves except Mr. Bilgewater.  When everyone leaves, Mr. Bilgewater looks at Mr. Hammerhead and asks, “Are you going to fire Thudpucker?”


“Do you want me to fire Thudpucker?”

“No.  I am not going to fire Thudpucker.  I don’t want you to fire Thudpucker.  I am going to have the new big boss fire Thudpucker.  Clean out your desk.”

Now Mr. Hammerhead can justify his decision to the people upstairs.  Mr. Hammerhead hires a new big boss.  The new big boss replaces Odious Thudpucker with a qualified journalist.

Sincerest regards,


PS.  I am not Paul Harvey.  However, I am open to becoming a paid commentator, columnist, or blogger. If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.

Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
All rights reserved.

Monday, August 22, 2011

EuroCrisis: Hocus Pocus--Focus!

Instead of relying on the unending stream of bad news to comment upon, I took some time to read some of the articles being written about the EuroCrisis.  I’m not sorry I did.

The EuroCrats are discussing solutions.  They are focusing on the unpopular solutions.  We used to believe that if medicine tasted bad, it was good for you.  Now we believe that the unpopular solution is always the best solution. 

The solution that no one likes is imposing sanctions on nations that do not improve their circumstances after receiving a bailout.

Your economy was in bad shape.  We gave you money to pay your national debts.  That was to help you while your economy improved.  Your economy did not improve.  Now we are going to punish you.  We are going to do this to help you. 

Some things require no additional comment.  The above paragraph is an example of that.

Another solution on the table is to create another layer of bureaucracy.  This is the toothless watchdog.  You feed the dog, walk the dog, listen to the dog bark, and blame the dog when your home is burgled.  My cat came up with that analogy.  Self-serving?  Yes.  Valid none-the-less.

The EuroNations currently staggering downhill economically do not need governance.  They need leadership.  Moreover, however, the leaders are in need of leadership.  All we have now is gratuitous management.

What has caused this flurry of activity?  I am embarrassed to say this.  Analysts.  Why am I embarrassed to say this?  I admittedly have only two skills.  An analytical mind and the ability to speak in metaphors.

Analysts are predicting the recession in Greece will continue.  They are basing their predictions on the fact that their assumptions failed to materialise.

Here is what happened.  The € 110 Billion Bailout to Greece was apparently predicated on the assumption that growth would return to Greece after some austere fiscal and economic changes.  When growth failed to arrive (Deus ex machina, I assume. Or Deus non machina for that matter.), the analysts predicted that the recession would continue.  Apparently, the Analysts never read Horace’s Ars Poetica.  Now, I never read it either. Still, here is the analogy.
Instead of putting 10% of your income into your retirement fund each year, I want you to put 5% of your income into your retirement fund each year.  This based on the assumption that your rate of return is going to double.

Instead of crunching the numbers, grasp the concept.

Thus far, there seems to be no solution.  There is no short-term solution to the problem.  There is no long-term solution to the problem.  What we do have, however, are steps being taken in the hopes that things will get better. 

This, we do, by calling the people trying to solve the problems, experts.

“Early to bed and early to rise, does not make you Ben Franklin.”—Slim Fairview

What is most startling about this situation is that there is little discussion about projects.  Cutting spending to the bone certainly gives the appearance of a better financial position.  It gives you the feeling of being in better financial shape.

You can also improve your circumstances by focusing on increasing the revenue.

Now, as I said elsewhere:

If you are unemployed, a government job is a job.

If you are an economist, a government job is a transfer payment.

However, we need a scapegoat.  There is, after all, a global economic crisis.  What happened?  Let’s blame it on John Maynard Keynes.  John Maynard Keynes may have as much to do with the problem as Maynard G. Krebs, but it will give us the opportunity to sell new ideas.

This in analogous to the decline in reading skills in the United States. 

With no evidence to suggest that Phonics caused the decline in reading scores, we began down the path of coming up with new and better ways to teach reading.  Each new way of teaching reading was embraced to solve the problem of declining test scores caused by the previous solution.  Ultimately, we blamed the test.  When that didn’t work, we began to demand testing the teacher.  The only ones who benefited were the ones who wrote and sold books explaining the new and better way of teaching youngsters to read.

The only people who got rich from Get Rich Quick books were the people who wrote them.  The only people who felt better from Self-Help Books were the people who made money writing them.

Thus it is with the EuroCrisis.  Everyone is in the same situation, it would seem.  Everyone has a solution.  The only people benefiting from the solutions, however, are the experts who make money selling their theories to the EuroCrats.

I once said in jest, “Put me in charge.  I can do just as bad a job, but I can come up with much better excuses.” Now I will say it not in jest.  "Put me in charge.  I can do just as bad a job, but I can come up with better excuses."

Let’s be honest, isn’t the feel-good course of action the one that helps us to show everyone that it was someone else’s fault.

Sincerest regards,


PS.  I am not Paul Harvey.  However, I am open to becoming a paid commentator, columnist, or blogger. If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.



RR #2
Route 390
Cresco, PA 18326

Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview

Friday, August 19, 2011

EuroCrisis Analogy

You and your two sisters have been asking your parents for an allowance.

They have resisted.  They have explained that you are not responsible.  However, they will discuss it privately.

A few days later, they call you and your two sisters to a meeting.  They announce that they will give you an allowance.  There are three conditions:

1.  You save some.

2.  You spend some.

3.  You give some to the less fortunate.

You all agree.  Happily.

You ask, “How much to we get?”

Your Dad explains. 

“Your Mom and I are putting all the money into a shoebox.  You may each take your allowance from there.”

Your one sister takes money out to buy two blouses.  She puts $10.00 in her Piggy Bank.

Your other sister takes money out to buy one blouse.  She puts $5.00 in her Piggy Bank.

You go to the shoebox and find only $3.00 left.  You complain to your parents.

Your parents tell you to, “put $1.00 in your Piggy Bank, give $1.00 to the poor, and to spend $1.00 on yourself.”

Now do you understand why the EuroCrisis has not been solved?




I am not Paul Harvey.  However, I am open to becoming a paid commentator, columnist, or blogger.

If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.

Sincerest regards,


Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview

Friday, August 12, 2011

You Can't Lead if You Can't Manage


We keep hearing about leadership.  Why?  Why are we discussing leadership when we can’t even manage to manage?

For the purposes of this discussion, we will discuss a team in your company.  There are three members on this team.  Athos, Porthos, and Aramis. 

If you are thinking “All for one and one for all,” you are thinking of The Three Musketeers.  That was then.  This is now.

The Boss, Mr. Odious, has received several complaints from Athos and Porthos that Aramis is not pulling his own weight.  Mr. Odious tends to ignore these things.  That is until Mr. Hammerhead hears about it.

Mr. Odious calls the three into his office.  You’ve heard it all before.  You may even sell this stuff.

Mr. Odious says, “There is no I in team” and he proceeds to talk about the visioning process, shared vision, group-think, and consensus building.  When he is finished, and after having mentioned efficiency, productivity, and personal responsibility, he hands each employee a smiley-face key chain, and sends the three back to work.

Mr. Odious tells Mr. Hammerhead that he had a talk and things should be fine.  Mr. Hammerhead is not reassured. 

The Big Boss does not want to hear about problems.  He doesn’t even want to hear about solutions.  Why not?  Because solutions mean problems.

The problem of Aramis continues.  Now, there is a bigger problem.  Mr. Hammerhead calls Mr. Odious and Aramis into his office.

“Mr. Odious, do you have the sales figures for the first two quarters?”


“Yes or no!”

“No, Sir.”

“Do you have a draft of the Quilby contract?  Yes or no?”

“No, Sir.”

“Which person in your department was responsible for these assignments?”

“Aramis, Sir.”

“Mrs. McGillicuddy, have D'Artagnan report to my office.”

“Yes, Sir.”

“Odious, Aramis is off the team.  D‘Artagnan will handle the assignments.”

Yes, Sir.”

“You may leave now, Aramis.  Odious, you stay.”

“Yes, Sir.”

“Odious, I can easily see that you cannot manage.  You received complaints on more than one occasion that Aramis was not pulling his own weight.  We don’t have the sales figures, we don’t have a draft of the contract, and this is not acceptable.  I don’t want it to happen again.  Understood?

“Yes, Sir.”

“That’s all.”

It is not long before Mr. Odious is replaced by D’Artagnan.

The main reason is that Athos and Porthos lost all respect for Mr. Odious.  Athos and Porthos have jobs to do.  The company relies on their accomplishing their assignments.  Aramis was the weak link.  Mr. Odious was a weaker link.  Mr. Odious not only could not lead, he could not even manage.

This plagues American business.

Athos and Porthos have a great deal of respect for D’Artagnan.  He knows his stuff.  He is capable of helping Athos and Porthos.  He has the respect of Mr. Hammerhead.  Mr. Hammerhead already knows D’Artagnan will be replacing Mr. Odious.

Mr. Hammerhead is a leader.  He is respected.  People want fair play.  They don’t want smiley-face key chains.

Had Mr. Hammerhead not replaced Mr. Odious, he would have both lost the respect of his employees and he would have lost the confidence of his bosses.

We have had our ability to manage, and by extension our ability to lead, compromised over the past several decades.

Leadership is this simple:

“Look behind you.  If people are following you, you’re a leader.  If they’re not, you’re not.”  The Quotations of Slim Fairview



PS.  I am not Paul Harvey.  However, I am open to becoming a paid commentator, columnist, or blogger. If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.

Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
All rights reserved.

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Senator Bilgewater: Politician or Window Dressing?

In all seriousness, investors don't really invest in politicians. They invest in the candidates who will further their own interests.

On that thought, it is analogous to the comment about US Bond ratings: Where else are they going to put their money?

While American Corporations are making foreign (capital) investments it could be said they have no faith in politicians or an acute grasp of the economy. I will assume the analysts can and have plotted the path of the trajectory.

Unless they are watching the news when they are reporting poll numbers (public opinion) savvy investors know the limits of the politicians. 

There is little that Senator Bilgewater* can do to resolve our "Jobs" crisis. As it has been said, the government cannot create jobs. Only the private sector can create jobs. Senator Bilgewater  is at this point in time an impediment to the creation of jobs.

Tip O'Neil once said, "All politics is local." This can also be said of the economy. Investors deal in large numbers. People want to know only one thing, "Will I have a job?"

Our country moves in spite of the politicians. In plain speak, the U.S. has had three GREAT Presidents: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and FDR. And I am a person who believes that Ronald Reagan was a President of Mythic Proportions. After all, he single-handedly tore down the Berlin Wall liberating 1 billion people ground beneath the boot heel of communist military occupation.

But that was then, this is now.

As an aside, there is a large difference between Soviet Style Communism and Chinese Style Communism. 

The Soviet Union had its going out of business sale years ago, changed its name, and reopened under new management--Russia.

China is the second fastest growing economy in the world. 

See the difference?

 Politicians are Window Dressing.  Senator Bilgewater is a Politician.  Therefore, Senator Bilgewater is Window Dressing.

Politicians? Window dressing.



I am not Paul Harvey. 

However, I am open to becoming a paid commentator, columnist, or blogger.

If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one

of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with

the thank you note.

Sincerest regards,

RR #2
Route 390
Cresco, PA 18326

Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview

* Senator Bilgewater, Senior Senator from Kansachusetts. 
Kansachusetts: The State We All Live In.

This message has been paid for by the Kansachusetts Chamber of Commerce.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

To Fix the Economy...


1.  Negotiate a deal with the Oil Companies.  You let them drill they pay a surcharge:  Fees go to environmental cleanups.

2.  Tax incentives to Oil Companies:  Invest your profits into clean energy [SOLAR] take a tax break.

3.  Shift the “Tax Cut” strategies.  [Trickle down is a myth—tell no one you heard it from me.]  Move the tax cuts to the level of people who spend money on Main Street.

4.  Scrap “No Child Left Behind”.  It was a miserable failure that doomed the lives of children across America.  No child will master the complexities of what he or she needs to know without a FOUNDATION.

Read, Write, Add, Subtract, Multiply, Divide.

            A.  Teach reading using phonics.  Children will improve on their own.
            B.  If a child hasn’t memorised the times tables at the grade appropriate level, the child is wasting time in math class.

            C.  Cut back on the number of teacher aides, add to the number of teachers.

5.  Create incentives for Domestic Borrowing.

6.  Create incentives for Domestic Investment

7.  There are two ways to stimulate the economy. 

            A. Take money out of the economy and put it back in.

            B.  Don’t take money out of the economy in the first place.

            C.  Choose B.

8.  Read my stuff today or listen to it from the experts a month from now. 

9.  Work on the above ideas while I work on coming up with more ideas.



I am not Paul Harvey. 

However, I am open to becoming a paid commentator, columnist, or blogger.

If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one

of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with

the thank you note.

Sincerest regards,

RR #2
Route 390
Cresco PA 18326

Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Congress: An Idiocracy, A Theocracy, But not a Democracy

This is Congress.  Faith leads to higher certitude than knowledge. [I had a Jesuit Education.]

This does not mean they are more right.  Only that they are more sure.

This is Congress.

On one side, people believe that if you cut taxes for the rich, the money will trickle down and the economy will trickle up.

Trickle down economics is a myth.

The other side believes that if you raise taxes and spend money, you will stimulate the economy.  You will create jobs.  As one pundit said, “No country ever taxed its way to prosperity.

Now, both sides have experts.  Economists.  Well, back in my youth someone said, “He knows the price of everything but the value of nothing.”  We can move in that direction.  However, can we say, “He knows everything but understands nothing”?  Well, not quite.  It is simply a matter of the interpretation of the truth.

As Jack Nicholson said to Diane Keaton in the movie, Something’s Gotta Give.  “I always told you some version of the truth.”

Thus, it is with Economists.

Here goes.

One Economist works for a company that sells red paint. He says, "If you want to improve your business, paint the walls red."

Another Economist works for a company that sells blue paint. He says, "If you want to improve your business, paint the walls blue."

That much may be obvious. The difficulty arises when they cite the statistics.

The Red Paint Economist says, "Our study shows that red paint motivates employees. They produce more widgets. Your productivity will go up."

The Blue Paint Economist says, "Our study shows that blue paint creates a more serene atmosphere. Your employees will make fewer mistakes and the quality of your widgets will go up."

What each side does not tell you is this:

With red paint, the employees work faster, make more errors, and reduce the quality of the output.

With blue paint, the employees make fewer mistakes and produce higher quality widgets, but make fewer widgets and productivity goes down.

However, they are experts; and we listen to them.

The following aspects of Economics must be taken into consideration.

Economic Stimulus.

Economic Stimulus works.  The issue is where do you stimulate the economy?

Now to explain. For this, we will need to create that all-important metaphor. In addition, I should like to apologise in advance for the one snarky remark I will make about a former President. (One must compare apples to apples.)

For the purposes of this lesson, we will assume that Joy, brown-bags it every day except Friday. On Friday, she takes 10 hard-earned dollars and goes to Whoopi's Sandwich Store for a baloney sandwich.

Now Elisabeth is out of work. However, Jimmy Carter feels her pain. Therefore, he taxes Joy $10 and gives it to Elisabeth so she can buy a baloney sandwich. Joy is not happy. She's being ripped off. Elisabeth is no better off because she still does not have a job. Now, what about Whoopi? She is no better off because she is still selling one baloney sandwich a week.

In response to critics, Jimmy decides to tax Whoopi $10 to train Elisabeth how to make baloney sandwiches. After getting her certificate, she goes to Whoopi's store looking for a job. However, Whoopi tells her, "Sorry, Friday is my last day. Jimmy Carter taxed me out of business."

Now, President Obama comes along and says, "That is not how to do it. I am going to have the SBA lend Elisabeth the money to go into her own business."

Elisabeth opens up a soda store next door to Whoopi's Sandwich Store.

Back to Joy. Aptly named because her tax cut allows her to go back to Whoopi's store and buy a baloney sandwich; and she goes next door to buy a soda.

Elisabeth is happy because she's making money, so she treats herself to a baloney sandwich.

Whoopi is thrilled because she doubled her sales volume and revenue. In fact, she is doing so well; she hires Sherri to help make sandwiches. (Whoopi trains Sherri, as it should be in business.)

Sherri is happy because she has a job, and, please forgive my little joke, her compensation package includes a free lunch. However, no beverage. Therefore, Sherri goes next door to Elisabeth's soda store to buy a soda. Well, with all this soda being sold, Elisabeth hires Barbara to work in her soda store. Now Barbara is thrilled because she has a job.

Back to the Oval Office:

The President's Economic Advisor comes in.

"You wanted to see me, Sir?"

"Yes, I have some money for you. It is part of Sherri and Barbara's benefits payments. They are out of work. I want you to send the money to Sherry and Barbara."

However, the advisor says to the President, "But Mr. President, Sherri and Barbara don't need that money anymore. They have jobs."

"That's great," the President says. "The government is saving money."

The advisor continues. "It's better than that. Since they are working, they are paying income taxes. So, I have some money to give to you from Sherri and Barbara."

"Wow", the President says. "I save money because Sherri and Barbara are working, and I bring in money because they are paying taxes. This stimulus package is great."

This is how economic stimulus works. It takes a little time, but this is how the economic stimulus works.

Government Borrowing

Wolf Blitzer wants to buy a new suit.  This, he figures, will attract more viewers [customers].  He borrows the money from John King—a CNN colleague.

Mr. Blitzer’s ratings [revenue] go up.  He repays Mr. King.

Mr. King, seeing Mr. Blitzer’s success, uses the profits from his lending venture to buy a new suit.  His ratings [customers] go up.

Upstairs, Mr. Turner is looking over the balance sheets.  He sees this uptick in [revenue].  He asks his accountant what happened.  His accountant tells him.  Mr. Turner gets an idea.  He issues a memo to his on air people.

CNN will make low interest loans to those who want to go out and buy a new outfit to wear on the air.

Ratings go up.  Revenue goes up.  Mr. Turner issues another memo.

Up until now, in the cafeteria, employees could buy a meal [breakfast, lunch, or dinner] for $10.  Due to the increased revenue, we are going to charge you [tax you] only $5.

As a result, the employees have more money to spend.  John King buys a new tie.  Gloria Borger buys a new scarf.  Candy Crowley buys a necklace.  Don Lemon buys a new shirt.

This upgrade in the “metaphorical image” generates more viewers [customers].  Revenues go up.  Salaries are increased.  All is well in CNNtopia.

However, what if all were not so enlightened.

What if Wolf Blitzer had borrowed the money from Bret Baier?

Well, Mr. Blitzer would still have a new suit.  However, the profits would have gone to Mr. Baier who would have used his profits to buy a new suit.  Mr. King, not having the profits from his loan to Mr. Blitzer, would have had to go to Shepard Smith for a loan to buy his new suit.

Now, Bret Baier and Shepard Smith could use their profits to invest in a business partnership to lend money to fellow Fox News Anchors.  They would have a spiffed up image and more viewers [customers] generating more revenue.

Back to CNN.

With Mr. Blitzer and Mr. King having to pay interest on the loans to people at Fox, they have to cut back on expenditures.  Now, instead of buying lunch or dinner in the cafeteria, they brown-bag it.  Revenues in the cafeteria fall.  CNN issues a memo.  Due to lost revenues, the cafeteria will have to raise prices [taxes] on lunches and dinners.  This affects the other employees.  No shirts, no scarves, no ties, no necklaces, declining image, lost customers, decreased revenues—CNNistant.

What is the crucial difference between CNNtopia and CNNistan?  That is the difference between solving the US economic crisis and not solving the US economic crisis.

The Multiplier Effect

Next, we have the Multiplier Effect.  While trickle down economics is a myth, the multiplier effect can be seen as counting the dollars in our economy.  This is an illustration.

This does not lend itself to a blog posting.  Thus, a brief PowerPoint presentation is available.  Real Brief.  Look and click to the next of several slides.

I will not use the word dishonest.  Our Congressional Leaders truly believe what they are saying.  Then, when the mounting debt is still there in the morning, they say, “I thought so.”



PS.  I am no Paul Harvey; however, I will entertain job offers as a paid blogger or commentator.



Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview