Economists are dumb, and had no idea that anything bad could happen.

Well, except for these guys. In 2004, they told President Bush that his economic policies were crazy and disastrous. The American people, being who we are (i.e., idiots) ignored them. Because hey, why listen to a bunch of eggheads? The fact that you have an IQ somewhere in the mid-double digits doesn't mean that your completely uninformed opinions aren't every bit as valid as those of a bunch of economists from Harvard, right?

WRONG.

However, they did get SOMETHING wrong. They correctly noted that deficits tend to be inflationary, and that the normal response of the Fed. would be to tighten the money supply. Which would have been the responsible thing to do, although it would have led to a short-term recession. Instead, the Fed. did the opposite; they pushed as much money as they could into the economy.

The way money is actually created is beyond the scope of this blog. I strongly suggest that every single citizen in this country take a course in money and banking at the business school of his or her local college, and re-take it until they actually understand it. Essentially, money is created in this economy by banks lending money to borrowers. The Fed. signals how much money it wants created by setting certain key interest rates, particularly the overnight rate.* By pushing the rates low, the Fed. signals to banks that they want money to be created; i.e., to lend money. Once all the truly credit-worthy borrowers had new financing, the banks followed the signals given by the Fed. and gave new loans to everyone who wanted one, irrespective of the credit-worthiness of the borrower or the value of the assets under mortgage.

We now have the current mess, due to these policies.

The current mess was predictable and was, to some extent, actually predicted. We Americans, by which I mean you people who did and continue to support Bush, considered (y)ourselves too smart to listen to the "nay-sayers", and contented ourselves with the proposition that the people who actually did speak out against Bush's economic policies were motivated purely by dis-like of the man.

Well done, Joe Six-Pack!

__________________
* google it all up.

I don't really blame Bush for all our troubles.

Instead, I blame everyone who voted for him.  Every single person.

The idea that people would vote for someone who they'd "like to have a beer with" is totally insane to me.  Seriously?  That's a deciding factor?

I don't want a president with whom I'd want to have a beer.  I want a president who is BETTER than that.  I want a president who's so freaking smart that I'd be almost embarrassed to talk to him.  I'd rather have Thomas Jefferson than Ulysses S. Grant.  For that matter, I'd rather have Ulysses S. Grant than George W. Bush.

Those who voted for him though that those of us on "the left" were motivated by Bush hatred. OF COURSE WE HATED THE GUY.  However, it's not true that we thought his policies were stupid because we hated him.  Instead, we hated him because we thought his policies were stupid.

Here are some instances from my personal experience:

1. I remember telling a neo-con (which should be synonymous with "stupid and venal" from now on [I'll get to that later]) that it was wrong to attack Iraq, since we didn't yet KNOW if they had WMDs, and we should abide by something approaching the rule of law.  I was told I had no idea what I was talking about.

2. I argued with a neo-con that Bush's fiscal policies were suicidal, and mentioned that Bush was setting up the same economic conditions that preceded the Great Depression.  I hadn't made that up; it reflected what a LOT of economists were saying back in 2006 and 2007.  I was told that Bush had provided a great economy, and I should stop complaining.

3. I was told that the increase in the price of gasoline was strictly due to market forces, rather than manipulation. Even the FTC finally recognized that there was manipulation in the oil market.

4. The best thing?  I was told that "liberals" only want to increase taxes, and that the robust economy created by Bush would be so freaking awesome that the growth would get rid of any deficits. Wrong.

The list goes on, but what's the point? Neo-cons are ALWAYS WRONG.  And that pisses me off. I hate Bush because he was an idiot.  But more than that, I hate every single idiot who voted for the guy.

You, the people who voted for Bush, fucked each and every citizen of the United States of America.  You have failed us.

Please, never vote again. 

A little about me.

Since this is the very first entry of this blog, I think it's necessary to tell you a little about me.

As an initial matter, I think this is as good a time as any to point out that I think the word "blog" is somewhat retarded. Or I would, if words themselves could be retarded. So, I suppose it would be more correct to state that I think the people who use the word "blog" are retarded, particularly if they use it as both a noun and a verb. And that probably includes you. I'm looking forward to when "blog browsing" is shortened to "blowsing."

But enough about all of that. Let's move on to the really important stuff. Namely, me.

I'm the universal measuring stick. I stand 6'2" and weigh about 180 lbs. If you need that in metric measurements, feel free to use google.com. If you're a guy and you're shorter than I am, you're essentially a midget. If you're taller than I am, you're freakishly tall. If you're heavier, you're a fat pig. If you're lighter, you're a puss.

If you're not as smart as I am (and, let's face it, you're probably not), you're an idiot. In the unlikely event that you're smarter than I am, you're some kind of genetic mutant who probably doesn't have any friends.

If you're not as good-looking as I am, you're a diseased troll. If you're better-looking than I am, you're probably gay.

I could go on, but the point should be clear. I'm not perfect, because I'm a mere mortal. I am, however, probably better than you.

No go forth and enjoy what you laughingly refer to as your life.