Sunday, January 07, 2007

What you see..............

.............. is not always what you get. Iowa currently has an unemployment rate of 3.5%, meaning there is virtually no systemic and long term unemployment in Iowa. Yet, Iowa is not prosperous. Our economy and population are shrinking (on a relative basis). Most of Iowa’s counties face nearly catastrophic social, demographic and economic decline. After eight years of Gov. Vilsack driving the economic train, today’s Des Moines Register provides a perfect example of the train wreck in progress.

Here’s a thought. With 3.5% unemployment, maybe the limit on job creation is the lack of people to fill the jobs. Say a multi-national company wanted to build a large industrial facility in Mt. Pleasant? Where would the prospective employer find the people to till the jobs?

It also can’t be a question of needing more “job training”. More job training is just liberal code for more CIETCs. Iowa needs indigenous employers, who have a long term investment in our state wide community. We have the chance, the biotech future is here.

We already have a well educated population, low crime, clean skies, good parks and good infrastructure. We are going to lose all of those things because our tax and regulatory policies, coupled with a level of government that is already approximately six times our pro rata share of the national population, have combined to create the perfect vortex of failure, the poverty of liberalism. We see the vortex effect all over Europe. Pursuit of the elimination of want creates a need for government services, causing an increase in taxes which results in lower real wages and a greater need for government assistance.

Iowa has become one of the most hostile business climates in the United States. Our corporate income tax and property tax burden are pretty much bottom five for businesses. Our economy is shrinking at a time when we enjoy almost unsustainably low unemployment. We are falling farther and farther behind the rest of the country, which continues to enjoy historic prosperity. Even as the failure of central economic direction becomes undeniable, here come the Democrats, with nothing to act as brake between Iowa and genuine socialism. I'm sure glad that liberals can do for us what they've already done to most of Europe.


The Silverback said...

Well said Ted. The Democrats have nothing to offer but poverty and failure.

Class warfare is their stock in trade-not success.

RF said...


I think you are approaching an interesting topic here. Rather than ponder how the D’s/liberals have messed everything up (remember R’s have had a very significant role in Iowa policies over the last 10-20 years), I think we should be discussing the greater economic tendencies happening in our country and in the world. We have low unemployment, as you point out. However, many of the new jobs are in the low-paying service sector. This is happening all over the country, not just in Iowa. Yes, we are maintaining a relatively large sector of good paying jobs for the well-educated. While we are losing well paying manufacturing jobs, we are gaining different kinds of jobs, mostly white collar, in some other industries. But the reality is that the low-paying service jobs are growing faster than the good paying jobs.

To be honest, I don’t know how much politicians can do about any of these tendencies. We can create Sporer’s ideal business climate or follow Edwards’ poverty reduction strategies, but I’m not convinced either strategy is going to solve many of these problems. Maybe we need to take the best ideas from Sporer and Edwards and try to adapt the best we can. This seems like global capitalism at work, not a liberal/socialist scheme.

Anonymous said...

low paying service sector versus the high paying union sector?

Anonymous said...

What are edwards poverty reducing strategies?

Anonymous said...

Here's a headline telling us what Edwards is doing. His goal to end poverty is nothing more than a desire to shill for unions. In the story below, you hear nothing about poverty really...just how much this will help him win the union vote. Union members are not poverty stricken, but their wage contracts are tied to the minimum wage. minimum wage goes up, they get an automatic raise. The people in poverty - stay in poverty.


January 4, 2007
Edwards Courts Unions Heading into ‘08
By Marie Horrigan

......His efforts may be bearing fruit, as his anti-poverty theme is drawing attention from segments of an important Democratic political constituency: organized labor.

Edwards threw his weight behind efforts to increase minimum wage levels in Ohio, Arizona and Michigan. In April, he marched a picket line with Teamsters Union President James Hoffa and service workers at the University of Miami.

Last year, Edwards spoke at the national conventions for three major unions: the AFL-CIO, the Change to Win Coalition and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. It was at the latter that Edwards proclaimed the labor movement “the greatest anti-poverty program in the United States.”

His singular approach to the issue appears to be giving Edwards entree to possible union endorsements, from which he was excluded in 2004.

....Edwards has made his strongest ties among SEIU and UNITE HERE, two unions with strong organizations in Nevada, a state where the hospitality and service industries are driving economic forces.

© 2006 Congressional Quarterly

If Edwards really cared about poverty he'd be more concerned about the slave class conditions of illegal aliens and ending the democrats reign over this invisible and unprotected group of humans.

It is THEIR policies that keep those people in slave like conditions. It is also the unreasonable demands of the unions that are destroying manufacturing in this country and forcing jobs overseas.

How does Edward square reducing poverty with his support of sustaining the slave wage class of illegal aliens?

How does Edwards square support for unions when the biggest competititor to union jobs and wages is the existence of the slave wage society exists with the support of D's like him?

The Democrats anti walmart movement is nothing more than a cover to bring union jobs to their benefactors.

Anonymous said...

why were d's so opposed to the raids at swift? Those used to be union paying jobs. Now, they are held by people who must hide in a secret society because they are illegal.

Why wasn't there more outrage against swift for killing off union jobs and giving them to illegal aliens?

R.O.C.K. In The USA said...

Ted-I agree. Why the hell aren't you running for State Chair. We've heard from everyone else. No one has gotten beyond "we need more money" or "leadership". Where, how?

You been giving the answers, we didn't listen and now we're wiped out.

RF said...

You may also be interested to know that some of the most generous welfare states (with extremely powerful unions) are considered to be among the most competitive economies in the world. There are many ways to go about building a healthy society and economy. It’s good to broaden one’s horizons.

Kenboiraq said...

Not to change the subject or to suddenly go after a Republican but I am getting a lot of flack from my fellow contractors over Senator Grassley's bill that changed the tax deductions for overseas Americans.

My guess is those living overseas already taxed by other countries will either reconsider such employment or change citizenship if necessary. It was not a good tax bill and I am personally ashamed of Senator Grassley for sticking it to a pretty firm patriotic group such as those working in Iraq. Getting a little break on taxes was one of the few benefits to this work. Perhaps Senator Grassley would prefer we outsource this type of work as Americans may be too expensive thanks to his tax changes.

Big-killer said...

Agrees TOTALLY with
r.o.c.k. in the usa

Anonymous said...

It depends on how you define competitive and at what price benefit?

Europe has double digit unemployment, with France being the worst and almost no entreneurial startups.

But, no one gets fired and they get to work a 30 hour work week with 6 to 8 weeks of paid vacation each year.

I guess that's pretty competitive.

Kenboiraq said...

It would be better for Senator Grassley to keep this segment of our job market competitive. Targeted taxation always changes the target - see the Merchant Marine shipping industry once our government increased taxes and requirements. We don't have one now! How much can you tax once the industry or target is gone?

mohammed was a pedophile said...


Charles the Senile has been screwing over the working class for the last 10 years.

RF said...

I said “some” welfare states. To educate yourself, see World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report at

Obviously all countries have issues they need to deal with. My point is, there are many factors that affect competitiveness and more than one economic model can be competitive. Despite EU, Europe is not one monolithic entity.

Kenboiraq said...

I bought a beer in the Frankfurt Airport last week and it cost double what it would cost in America!

Our dollar is under assault in more ways than we know.

mohammed was a pedophile said...


Those who accuse Buchanan of advocating protectionism better watch what they say right now. The cheapest and easiest way to practice protectionism is to devalue the dollar.

Anonymous said...

4:49, great post as is Sporers. And of course the real end game for Democrats is that each new union member, (public or private) creates more contributions to Democrats to help keep them in power. This is the REAL danger of all this. Dims don't care if they kill the goose that lays the golden egg if it keeps them in power.

We have a whole nation full of idiots who actually believe that Democrats care about them. Democrats only care about themselves.

Anonymous said...

Great point 9:04. We know this nonsense about minimum wage has nothing to do with poverty and is all about paying back the unions. Glad you brought up the forced contribution to the political party.

Rants and Lundby - are you listening? 08'ers? Are you listening?